FEDERAL EUROPE 
                       A STRONG EUROPE

FEDERAL EUROPE NEWS  
For  news in France see French FE  news page. For  news in Germany see German FE news page.

Week 26, Year 2022

The green deal, a very insufficient program?
​
First of all, a clarification concerning the war aims in Ukraine. It is the territorial integrity and independence of Ukraine that must be defended by Europeans, not membership in the EU or NATO. 

Ukrainians should not need and they actually do not need the prospect of EU or NATO membership to defend their independence. The prospect of membership alone cannot justify the Ukrainian war effort or Western support. To fight, Ukrainians need patriotism and weapons, especially tanks, fighter planes and long-range anti-aircraft missiles, not EU candidate status. 

The green deal includes a series of European regulatory and financial measures to accelerate the emergence of renewable and sustainable energy, to improve energy efficiency and to encourage the digitalization of the economy. 

Next Generation EU is the financial component of the green deal, for 750 million euros, including 500 million in grants. These funds are intended to finance projects planned by the green deal and which will be presented by European countries individually.  We are struck by the absence of major European projects developed in common capable of profoundly influencing the energy policy of all European countries by creating a vast European solar and nuclear program. We are also struck by the absence of industrial concentrations and large commercial support programs in the field of renewable and sustainable energies. These concentrations and support would be able to strengthen the competitiveness of European players in this sector.

Poland, Italy and Spain, for example, will continue to favor coal or gas. Germany, on the other hand, is forced to revive coal mining in order to cope with reductions in Russian gas supplies.
The impact of the green deal on CO2 emissions, pollution, energy prices and European energy independence is therefore expected to be small. 

At the macroeconomic level, the green deal is not sufficient to reduce the European growth gap with the USA in 2021. (5.7% growth in the USA in 2021 compared to 4.8% growth in the Eurozone in 2021). The European recovery will remain below the US recovery in 2022 and will be impacted by high inflation despite European stimulus plans that are two to three times lower than those of the US and China. 

In addition, the carbon tax mechanism at the borders will have to be implemented very gradually so as not to penalize European industry, which uses free CO2 emission certificates, and so as not to expose itself to retaliation from countries that export to the European market. This mechanism will therefore not significantly improve the effectiveness of the green deal. 

Only a European federal government could lead an effective and economically efficient environmental policy by creating large-scale nuclear, wind, river and electricity infrastructure projects on a European scale and by supporting the European green industry through concentrations, subsidies and preferential access to European markets, as China or the USA do. 

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

Week 25, Year 2022

The French legislative elections and Europe

The presidential party won a relative majority in the second round of the French legislative elections.

It is now necessary to set up a political coalition to govern France. This formal or informal coalition can be formed by Ensemble, by part of the ecologists, by part of the socialists, by part of the Republicans and by some elected representatives of the right and left. 

The complicated political situation in France is proof that the election of the President of the Republic by universal suffrage does not guarantee a parliamentary majority and does not eliminate the risk of cohabitation in the subsequent legislative elections. This is undeniably detrimental to the efficiency and coherence of government in France. 

It is therefore necessary to consider creating a presidential regime in France in which the President governs and the Assembly legislates, which is much clearer and more efficient. A parliamentary regime in France would be a serious handicap for this country. It would make France difficult to govern, given the problems French parties have in forming stable and lasting government coalitions. This would also be true for future European federal institutions, given the size and diversity of Europe.

In a future government coalition, the President of the Republic must first and foremost commit the country to European federalism, even if it means making some concessions on taxation, pensions or nuclear power, for example. It will still be possible to change direction on these issues after the next elections. On the other hand, every month lost on the road to European federalism proposed by Germany is a serious threat to the prosperity and security of the French people in a world where American military protection of Europe and European financial solidarity are no longer guaranteed and can weaken very quickly given the growing geopolitical threats and economic risks.  

Moreover, only the European federalist project implemented jointly with Germany can constitute a sufficiently attractive political horizon to stop the progression of nationalist and populist forces that flatter the instincts of withdrawal and disorganization.  


Week 24, Year 2022

Industrial policy in Europe: a programmed failure?

We often hear that industrial policy in Europe is making progress, particularly with the European battery alliance, which should boost battery production on European soil and increase the European market share from 7% to 25% within a few years. 

But the European battery alliance pools research funding of around 20 billion euros, sets a regulatory framework and creates an institutional environment that facilitates cooperation between European manufacturers. It does not create any concrete industrial projects, nor does it bring about any industrial concentration.

The pooled funding between European countries for battery research is a good thing, given the amount of capital required and the financial risks involved. But this funding is insufficient because each European country maintains an independent research policy that generates significant costs and prevents it from contributing enough. Under these conditions, there is no guarantee that the Europeans will be able to regain significant market share from the Chinese and the Americans, who are implementing industrial policies for batteries with greater financial resources and by subsidizing industrial projects. 

The semiconductor legislative package for Europe is in a similar situation. This legislative package provides public and private funds for existing companies and start-ups in the semiconductor sector, it sets up a fiscal and social framework to attract investments and it institutes a coordination mechanism between European states and the European Commission to monitor the semiconductor market and anticipate its needs. It does not provide for any cooperation, joint projects or industrial concentrations. 

The current European industrial policy initiatives are better than nothing, but they cannot replace cooperation between industries, joint industrial projects and industrial concentrations, which are indispensable elements to obtain good results. These cooperations, projects and concentrations come into being in large numbers when they are promoted by a single government responsible for industrial policy. Only a single European government would have the will and the means to create enough industrial cooperation and to concentrate industries. Such a government would also be able to mobilize far more funds than the European Commission because of its financial strength and its European loans. 

In the current situation, there is some industrial cooperation, but it is difficult to set up and complicated to implement because of rivalries between European governments, because of the lack of a single vision on subjects that are often linked to electoral issues and national sovereignty. 
If we look at the example of Eurocopter, we see that the decision to create the Tiger combat helicopter was taken to pool costs and skills. But France continues to procure purely French helicopters, which is detrimental to the development of military cooperation, and the Germans continue to procure purely American helicopters. Moreover, rivalries between industrialists, each responsible for a part of the project, dilute the responsibility and can be detrimental to the quality of the product, and thus to its reliability or efficiency, as the numerous failures of the Tiger helicopter prove.   

There are also some industrial concentrations in Europe, but they remain the exception for the same reasons. When they are set up, they generally function well, as is the case for Airbus. Nevertheless, for every 1 Airbus, how many European industrial mergers are not implemented because of the divergent views of European governments and their lack of common will? Rail transport, air transport, telecommunications, land armament, information technology, renewable energies, so many sectors that have not given rise to European industrial mergers, in areas where mergers are nevertheless necessary to boost European industry in the face of the USA and China in particular and to create European champions. 

This explains why the main regulatory, structural and financial efforts concerning industrial policy are still and above all the responsibility of the European national states, with results that remain poor due to the high degree of industrial and technological interdependence in Europe. This leads to the progressive downgrading of Europe. 
If we look at French industrial policy, we see that it is still effective in some sectors such as nuclear power, but this effectiveness is decreasing because of the interdependence of its supply chains in Europe and the dispersion of technological skills in Europe. France is constantly falling behind the rest of the world in terms of economic growth and the number of industrial patents. It is true that France has produced nearly 25 unicorns by 2022 thanks to a dynamic public and private financing system, which is a very good result, but these unicorns cannot compensate for the fact that the French economy is falling behind due to the lack of an effective European industrial policy. Moreover, these unicorns must become European and world champions, which will not be easy without an effective industrial policy capable of reserving certain markets for European companies. 

The situation in Germany is similar. Economic growth rates and industrial innovation are falling behind China and the rest of the world every year. The German nuclear industry has almost been dismantled and the renewable energy sector is not developing properly. The German mittelstand and the German chemical, automotive and useful machinery giants continue to support the German economy, but their competitiveness is eroding. The electrification of vehicles remains slow and costly for the consumer, with energy prices rising sharply.   
​
Only an industrial policy steered by a Franco-German or European government will make it possible to relaunch innovation and growth in Europe thanks to coherent decisions, massive financial resources, and regulatory and sectoral measures that are valid for the entire European territory. This is the price that Europeans will have to pay to maintain and increase their market share in the high value-added sectors of the international production value chain, which is the only way to sustainably defend the purchasing power of European citizens.   

Week 23, Year 2022

Weakening Russia or strengthening Europe?

The war in Ukraine has revealed the expansionist character of the Russian regime which claims to turn Ukraine into a protectorate or a Russian province. 

This war puts an end to the French and German illusions concerning a Franco-Russian or German-Russian partnership capable of strengthening the French and German position in Europe in the face of the USA.

This war also makes it possible to understand that Russia, tacitly supported by China to circumvent the Western sanctions, is able to use its power and its will to successively subject its neighbors: Kazakhstan, Georgia, Belarus, Armenia, Ukraine. This is the continuation of the Muscovite expansionist policy.

Faced with a Russia that is revealing its capacity for conventional, cyber and even nuclear aggression, Europeans now have two solutions: weaken Russia or strengthen Europe.

Those who seek to weaken Russia, to prevent it from dominating the European continent have certain reasons to do so. The American security guarantee ́ is far from absolute since the vital interests of the USA are not at stake if Russia were to attack Moldova or the Baltic countries and insofar as the American budgetary problems are likely to reduce the financial and military aid they can provide Moreover, Russia no longer represents a world superpower capable of jeopardizing the social organization of the Western countries, but it still possesses a considerable nuclear and missile arsenal that can deter or prevent the USA from intervening in certain cases.

To weaken Russia militarily and diplomatically, it would be necessary to prevent any prospect of voluntary unification of the Russian world and to reduce the verticality of power in Russia. To do this, it would be necessary to integrate Ukraine into the EU and to support the Russian democratic opposition. But political interference is unlikely to have any effect in Russia and may lead to disorganization or dislocation of the country. The integration of Ukraine into the EU has the major disadvantage of blurring the European consciousness by complicating the answer to the question of Europe's borders and it risks creating a casus belli between Russians and Europeans over Ukraine. It is much better to support the Ukrainian army and resistance on a massive military scale. 

Ukraine is situated between Europe and Russia, but because of its history, culture and ties it belongs to the same world as Russia, even if its future development could slowly change its orientation.

Seeking to weaken Russia is therefore not an attractive option and may prove counterproductive.

Instead of trying to weaken Russia, the best way to secure the continent is to strengthen Europe. What does strengthening Europe mean? To allow Europeans to defend themselves alone, especially against Russia and perhaps against China, and to give them the capacity to govern themselves effectively.

In order to defend itself, only a European federal state, Franco-German to begin with, is indispensable to constitute and use very powerful European armed forces. On this point, the German rearmament of 100 billion euros, including 50 billion euros over the next five years to reach 2% of GDP in military spending, does not change the problem of European defense.  The renewed German army will not allow Europeans to defend their eastern border alone. 

In order to be governed effectively, Europeans must create a European political organization that is able to decide and act sovereignly on essential issues that can no longer be dealt with at the national level, such as defense, diplomacy, industry-energy and the environment. 

The real strengthening of Europe therefore necessarily involves a process of federalization, which must be launched as soon as possible for the current institutional and political authorities. This will then allow this process to be continued by a vast societal debate in France and Germany on the best way to federalize Europe. This process will be completed by the parties and political forces taking European federalism into account in their political programs and election campaigns.   


Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

Week 22, Year 2022

European and American interests in Ukraine 

American and European interests in Ukraine are not identical.

Supporting the Ukrainian army and resistance to protect Eastern Europe, especially Moldova and the Baltics, and to roll back reactionary nationalist and leftist forces in Europe are goals on which Europeans and Americans can agree. A definitive Russian victory in Ukraine would unquestionably be dangerous for security in Europe, for the continent's economic and social stability and for the strength of NATO. 

But there are nevertheless fundamental differences of interest between Europeans and Americans in Ukraine. 

The Europeans have an interest in promoting a rapprochement between Ukraine and Russia after the war in order to re-establish possible normal relations with the Russians, who are important neighbors. They have no interest to integrate Ukraine in the EU or in NATO
They should contribute to make Ukraine an independent country, partner of Europeans and able to defend its independence by delivering heavy weapons in large quantities (fighter planes, tanks, artillery, long range anti-aircraft missiles) without compromising a possible future rapprochement between Ukraine and Russia.

There is also a real danger in integrating Ukraine into the EU given the guarantee of defense between member countries which requires direct military intervention. This could lead to a nuclear conflict with Russia, which considers Ukraine to be part of its territorial zone. 

For the Americans, on the contrary, the integration of Ukraine in the EU and NATO would be a way to keep and strengthen their geopolitical ascendancy in Europe insofar as these two organizations depend on the USA to ensure the defense of their members. This would also allow them to advance their gas and military-industrial interests.

Why are the Europeans once again unable to define their interests correctly and to defend them effectively in this matter?

Because the divergence of views and interests between European countries cannot be overcome since each European state conducts its own foreign policy towards Russia and to a lesser extent towards the USA, and because these multiple foreign policies are characterized by the weakness of each European country in the face of Russia and the USA. This reduces to nothing any chance of leading a coherent European foreign policy. 

 The Europeans are therefore today unable to defend Ukraine properly and to make it an independent partner open to a rapprochement with Russia if the economic and political conditions allow it.  The EU, France and Germany have been unable to deliver enough weapons and train the Ukrainian army to enable Ukraine to defend itself. European arms deliveries and financial support after the outbreak of the conflict are slow and insufficient to enable Ukraine to resist.

Given their decisive role in the war, it is naturally the USA which has influence on future peace negotiations and which is able to promote its gas and arms exports to Europe. 

With a European federal government, the decision to protect the Ukrainian partner could have been taken much more easily thanks to the centralization of the European political decision and thanks to the European military power. In order to defend European interests in the war in Ukraine and to contribute to the stability of the continent, it is the concrete steps towards European federalism that will be decisive, not the security treaties. 

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

Week 21, Year 2022

European energy policy: a programmed failure?

A coherent energy policy, providing low prices, ensuring independence of supply and allowing environmental efficiency is only really possible with a European federal government capable of investing rapidly, massively and coherently. The dispersion and incoherence of energy policies in Europe concerning nuclear, wind, coal or gas are proof of this.   

The European energy dependence, the high cost of energy in Europe and the low reduction of CO2 emissions since 1990 are the consequence of this incoherence.

Until we have a federal European energy policy, what should European leaders do in the current situation?

Subsidize common projects with European funds. These European projects allow to lower the production costs and to limit the divergences of investments in Europe by proposing attractive solutions for the electrification and hydrogenation of industries and vehicles. The European battery alliance is a good example of these joint projects, but these projects can of course only develop as quickly as with a European government, which is the only one able to mobilize funds faster and more massively. As a result, there is nothing to say that the European market share of 7% for batteries can easily increase at the expense of the Chinese or American market share.   

To proceed to the concentration of the energy industries, in particular solar, wind and nuclear, in order to obtain a better competitiveness and lower costs. This will obviously be more difficult to achieve than with a European government capable of overcoming the particular interests of each country

Subsidize intra-European transport infrastructure (waterways and railways), support the electrification of heating systems, and strengthen the thermal insulation of housing to reduce European dependence on gas and oil, which characterize these sectors.  This can be achieved through financial and regulatory incentives. 

Diversifying supplies to Iran and the Gulf countries at the expense of Russia as long as gas and oil imports remain necessary. These countries are less dangerous than Russia and are less powerful than the USA commercially and do not use fracking which remains dangerous for the environment. 

To encourage European consumers to consume better and therefore to consume less by favouring high quality products and by reducing waste. 

It is in this direction that the green deal should be reoriented. The green deal does not allow the financing of European energy projects. This erroneous policy of the Commission is explained by the weight of the particular interests of each State and of each European leader for whom energy remains a politically sensitive national subject.  The objective of this new European energy policy is to move more quickly towards carbon neutrality in 2050, to further reduce CO2 emissions, to increase energy independence, including vis-à-vis the USA, and to have lower prices for consumers and industry. 
However, it will remain much less effective than the energy policy that could be conducted by a European federal government, which would have exclusive competence in energy and industrial policy. As a result, Europe's energy backwardness is likely to continue for a long time under the current European institutional political conditions.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

Week 20, Year 2022

The concept of European strategic autonomy through European defence, utopia or reality?

For Europeans to become strategically autonomous, they must be able to defend their territory and their interests alone.

This requires the ability to create effective armed forces and the will to use them if necessary.

All this requires a solid and coherent political will which cannot be obtained with 27 sovereign states each defending their own particular interests. There is no superpower in the EU, so European defense is unable to overcome differences of opinion and interest and therefore does not represent a credible alternative to NATO for the countries of the Euro-Atlantic area. 

If NATO is a credible organization, it is because of the military and diplomatic superpower of the USA, which is able to direct, coordinate and support the actions of the member countries of the alliance.

So what can be done with regard to European defense in this situation?

First of all, to recognize that a European defense worthy of the name, i.e. capable of ensuring the defense of European territory and interests in an autonomous way, requires the creation of a European federal state. It is only with a European federal state that we will be able to create a European pillar of NATO allowing Europeans to become autonomous. This European pillar will make it possible to organize cooperation and transition with the American pillar of NATO as long as the Europeans are not completely united and are not sufficiently armed to do without NATO. 

Second, create a European command for cyber and space. The defensive use of these two weapons, which are largely deterritorialized, is not likely to give rise to controversy. Their offensive use may in some cases be a source of divergence of views and should therefore be the subject of a consensus between the European countries that will be part of this European command. Enhanced cooperation on this subject would make it possible to minimize the risks of blockage on the part of certain countries reluctant to defend European interests.  The integration of these two weapons at the European level will considerably reinforce their effectiveness and greatly reduce their operating costs.  

Thirdly, to pursue and amplify European defence, i.e. mainly industrial cooperation in the military sector, in order to preserve the defence industrial and technological base in Europe. In order to facilitate industrial cooperation, which is always difficult to achieve between sovereign states, each of which defends its own particular interests, it will be necessary to proceed with the defragmentation of European defence industries, notably through vertical and horizontal concentrations to create competitive companies in related civil and military fields.   

Fourthly, to pursue European military missions, being aware that these missions, which remain useful, can only be auxiliary missions (fight against piracy etc...) given the confederal nature of the EU. 

Finally, develop intra-European military exchanges and create common military institutions (training centers, command centers, logistics centers, etc.) to strengthen the pro-European feeling in the armies of European countries and to prepare minds for European federalism.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)​

Week 19, Year 2022

The risks of a Europe of small steps

Dear European citizens, dear members, dear supporters, dear friends,

Some people think that we should not talk openly about European federalism in France so as not to arouse public opinion against European construction.

Federalism would be better achieved by moving in this direction without saying so, and by limited progress that will one day bring about a change of mentality and a shift in political interests. Only then will it be possible to make European federalism a reality.

The problem with this Europe of small steps is first of all that if there is never any talk of a federal perspective, public opinion, which is necessarily driven by the need for a collective sense of purpose, remains in thrall to the French national perspective, the only political horizon on offer.  This reinforces the ideological ascendancy of the nationalists and considerably hinders the progression of the feeling of European belonging, in spite of the common achievements.

Secondly, small progress and European projects can only be achieved in areas that do not call into question the budgetary and military sovereignty of France. Otherwise, public opinion, unprepared for federalism, would refuse it. This no longer makes it possible to advance the construction of Europe, because all significant new advances now require the abandonment of a large part of budgetary or military sovereignty. The lack of significant progress in European integration since the creation of the euro underlines this. The covid debt, for example, which has been useful, cannot be extended or renewed because it is exclusively linked to the exceptional event of the pandemic. 

And waiting for the hypothetical emergence of a European consciousness, a European people or a European interest clearly identified by all to create the European federal state cannot work because of the size and historical diversity of Europe. Without a real common European destiny embodied in a federal state, we will see the gradual resurgence of national antagonisms in Europe, especially if the USA withdraws from the continent.   

This is why it is necessary to use the creation of a European federal government as a tool to facilitate the emergence of European consciousness, interests and people. 

It is possible to create this state provided that it is done gradually. The first step must be to set as an objective the creation in the more or less long term of the European federal state because the strategic and economic conditions require it. This will help to acclimatize the population to this new political horizon and to reinforce European federalism in public opinion. The second step must be to discuss the ways and means to achieve this goal.  Sovereignty of the European Parliament? Sovereignty of the European Commission? Majority rule in the European Council? Creation of a federal core within the EU with a group of founding states? This will allow us to select the best way to make European federalism a reality. In this respect, it is doubtful whether the European Parliament or the European Commission, even if appointed by European citizens, will be able to impose their budgetary and legislative authority on national governments and parliaments. 

The third step is to convince political parties to include European federalism in their political programs and election campaigns. 

In reality, for many European confederalists, the rejection of federalism is above all a way of preserving the current system, which is comfortable because it allows them to talk about Europe without upsetting their political, electoral and media habits. This allows us to avoid embarking on the path of a powerful and effective Europe, which requires taking on heavy responsibilities to properly defend the interests of Europeans. The confederalists are objectively allied to the crypto sovereignists who vainly try to use Europe to reinforce French power to the detriment of the USA in Europe and not to unite the European peoples. Yet the union of European peoples in a federal state is the only way to guarantee the independence and long-term security of Europeans.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

Week 18, Year 2018

Europe and General de Gaulle

One of the reasons that explains the score of anti-European parties and candidates such as Marine Le Pen and Jean Luc Mélenchon is the constant reference in France to General de Gaulle's doctrine of sovereignty and grandeur 

This doctrine is still found today in the idea that France must use Europe to be strong thanks to the power multiplier provided by the euro, by the European trade policy and by European military cooperation. The hope is to create a European strategic autonomy dominated by France, the only continental European power with nuclear weapons and the right of veto in the UN. 

The problem is that France cannot dominate Europe politically, because it is the United States that has been defending the continent since 1945, thanks to its military credibility, its diplomatic power and its central role in the defense of Germany. France cannot provide these elements. It is therefore not in the interest of European countries to follow France in trying to create a European strategic autonomy with respect to the United States.   

This is what General de Gaulle was forced to realize when the Germans maintained their privileged ties with the United States after the signing of the Elysée Treaty in 1963. To convince the Germans to bet on France, France must accept a federal union of France with Germany, as German governments often propose. Only a Franco-German federal government could defend Europe without the help of the USA and would represent a great diplomatic and military power on a continental scale.

This federal leap that would have to be taken was not contrary to the expectations of General de Gaulle, who believed that it was not forbidden to think and hope that one day a European people would make it possible to form a European federal state.  But he had grown up in the 19th century and had fought in the European wars of 1914 and 1940. It was therefore mentally difficult for him to accept federalism from above immediately to facilitate the emergence of the European people. Hence his opposition to the EDC and the Hallstein plan, even though the creation of a European state was necessary to facilitate the emergence of the European people, just as the creation of the Italian state in 1860 facilitated the emergence of the Italian people, and just as the creation of the European Central Bank in 1998 strengthened European consciousness.   

The desire to bring France and Germany closer together to form an independent European power and the acceptance in principle of European federalism are the two elements of General de Gaulle's thinking that could allow for the renewal of Gaullism in a pro-European direction. 

If de Gaulle were alive today, who knows if he would not be in favour of the creation of a strong Franco-German federal state to be able to defend French and German interests properly. Let us not forget that General de Gaulle often surprised his contemporaries by his anti-conformist military ideas and by his innovative political orientations, notably the large autonomous armored units in 1934, the participation in 1967 and the regionalization in 1969.    

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

Week 17, Year 2022

Europe and the victory of Emmanuel Macron

Marine Le Pen lost the second round of the French presidential election, but her score rose again, exceeding 40% of the votes cast, which is considerable.

This very high score is explained in particular by the legitimacy of her program of French independence in Europe and by the nationalist mobilization of spirits that this damaging program of turning inward provokes.

To counter this nationalism, a legitimate and mobilizing pro-European program is necessary. The defense of the existence of the European Union cannot be enough because the European Union is not powerful enough and is not credible enough to arouse support and mobilization.

Only the prospect of creating a powerful and efficient European federal state, starting with Germany, which will propose it in 2021, can legitimize the European project by giving it a Euro-national consistency. And only the federal European project can really mobilize the voters of the center-right, the center-left and the left by its military, diplomatic, industrial and ecological efficiency. 

As with Germany, such a European federalist project will be the result of political will. It must therefore be proposed to the people by political forces. European patriotism is too weak to generate a bottom-up federalist movement. Proposing a European federal perspective for France should be the task of President Macron, who represents French-style social democracy, is young and could one day be elected to lead this federal state.    


Week 16, Year 2022

Europe and the second round of the French presidential election. 

A little practical information first.  Davud Khan's book entitled Vers la République Fédérale Européenne is now available on Amazon in paper and Kindle versions. 

Concerning the second round of the presidential election, it is indisputable that the political project of Emmanuel Macron does not attract the support of the French. It is the rejection of the far right that will perhaps allow him to beat Marine Le Pen in the second round.
This situation is dangerous for the social democrats. The political dynamic is currently on the side of the nationalist far right, since it has a prejudicial but clear and mobilizing project: French independence in Europe and in the world.  

Without a clear and mobilizing project, the social democrats and liberals will be dominated in terms of ideas by the nationalist right and will probably be defeated one day in the ballot box by the extreme right, in particular thanks to the presence of the candidate of the nationalist left in the second round. An alliance of the nationalist right with leftist nationalism is also a possibility. Indeed, this left also advocates the independence of France in Europe at the expense of European solidarity.

Only an ambitious European project can mobilize the French, since the very strong interdependence of France with the other European countries and the decline of its power vis-à-vis the rest of the world make the project of a strong and independent France unrealistic.

It is indisputable that the confederal system of the EU in its current form does not sufficiently arouse the support of citizens. It even constitutes a factor of rejection for many of them because of its economic, energy and military inefficiency. 
The best way for social democrats and liberals to stop the nationalist dynasty of the right and the left which threatens the interests of France is therefore to propose a strong European project capable of defending itself and of implementing efficient industrial projects. For this, a single European federal government responsible for defense, foreign policy and industry is necessary.

The prospect of very gradually building this powerful European federal state with the Germans, who have proposed it in 2021 in their coalition contract, would mobilize the social democratic, ecologist and centrist electorate much more than all the proposals in Emmanuel Macron's program.

Given the threat that Marine Le Pen's victory would represent for the Franco-German relationship, for Franco-German friendship, for European solidarity, for the solidity of NATO, for the integration of immigrants and for civil peace, FEDERAL EUROPE calls to vote for Emmanuel Macron. 



Week 15, Year 2022

The result of the first round of the presidential election and Europe

The first round of the presidential election in France confirms two structural and essential political trends. 

First, the political marginalization of the pro-European right. As the national theme is a central theme for the right, it is the parties that advocate French independence to the detriment of European solidarity that continue to progress, which places the pro-European conservative right in a dead-end situation. 

If the pro-European right moves closer to nationalist ideas, it loses voters to the social democrats and does not sufficiently attract voters tempted by nationalism

This phenomenon is also at work in Germany, with the AFD party taking root, but given Germany's Nazi past, the score of the extreme nationalist right remains limited in that country, even if this score may keep the CDU out of power for a long time. 

In order to emerge from defeat, as in Germany, or from marginalization, as in France, the pro-European right must adopt European patriotism in order to win back the national theme and must defend the creation of a powerful European federal state. To achieve this, an alliance of conservative and liberal pro-European parties in France with conservative and liberal pro-European parties in Germany is necessary. 

The second structural trend confirmed by these elections is the ever-increasing distance of a large part of the French electorate from the strategic and economic realities of the world, due to the demagogy and lack of competence of most politicians. They tirelessly repeat that all the solutions formulated by General de Gaulle in 1960 when Germany was divided and when Eastern Europe was sovietized are still valid in the Europe of 2022.   



Week 14, Year 2022

The program of Yannick Jadot and Europe

Yannick Jadot, supported by the party Europe Ecologie Les Verts, is a candidate for the presidential election 2022 in France. 

How can his program be useful for the progressive realization of the federal unity of European countries, which 58% of the French consider desirable? (Odoxa survey December 2021)  

This political program proposes in particular the following measures: 

Towards a federal Europe

"Too many necessary decisions on taxation, foreign policy or social policy are blocked by the need to obtain the unanimity of the Member States. We will demand the activation of the clauses in the European treaties that allow certain areas to be moved from unanimity to qualified majority voting. Where necessary, we will set up enhanced cooperation to avoid being blocked by a handful of Member States, while allowing them to join these projects later. In this framework, we will defend the strengthening of the role of the European Parliament: we will promote the use of the ordinary legislative procedure (known as co-decision) on all policies and the creation of a real right of legislative initiative for the Parliament.

The will to build a federal Europe is a very good thing, but a federal European state cannot be created with majority votes, for which there is no consensus in the European Council.
But a European federal state cannot be created with majority votes, for which there is no consensus in the European Council. Enhanced cooperation does not allow for the creation of a European federal government, which is necessary to create a single European army, diplomacy, industrial policy and environmental policy. These cooperations could be useful for the realization of certain projects, but these projects do not allow Europe to get out of the economic and strategic impasse in which it finds itself and which is causing its decline.  
Setting up a constituent convention is an interesting idea to study how to create a federal core within the EU with a few countries that wish to create together a European federal state with limited competences and adapted resources. 

Building a Europe of the people

"We will defend the establishment of transnational lists for the European elections, in addition to the national lists. The European Commissioner will be proposed from among the elected MEPs. This will allow European citizens to have a direct influence, not only on the composition of the European Parliament, but also on the composition of the European Commission.

European Commissioners appointed from among the MEPs elected on transnational lists will help to develop European awareness. But this will not create sufficient political legitimacy for the European Commissioners to impose their fiscal, political and legislative authority on national parliaments and governments   

Strengthening the Europe of youth and democracy

"We will reinforce the place of Europe in school curricula, support the mobility of schoolchildren, students, young people and people in vocational training through an increase in the credits dedicated to Erasmus+ and complementary grants.
Strengthen the democratic control of agencies engaged in security missions (Eurojust, Europol, Eurodac and Frontex).
Make it easier for citizens to bring cases before the Court of First Instance and the CJEU and strengthen their means."

These are good ideas, but they cannot decisively improve the lot of Europeans, except for the reinforced control of European agencies. These should be placed mainly under the control of the European Council or the European Commission, since they are under the executive power. 

A European justice

"We will give a strong existence to the European Judiciary. We will ask for the possibility of citizens to bring cases before the Court of First Instance and the Court of Justice of the European Union to be extended, and for the powers of the European Public Prosecutor to be expanded. We will defend the increase of the means of the Court of First Instance and the Court and to strengthen the democratic control of the bodies "Eurojust" (judicial coordination against organized crime), "Europol" (police coordination) and of the "Eurodac" system (comparison of fingerprints of asylum seekers and illegal immigrants on the territory).

These are good proposals to strengthen the European consciousness and identity. 

An autonomous European budget

"A green France will have to support a real European budget for the ecological and social transition fed by own resources that contribute to social justice, by making those who escape taxation today pay. The EU budget will have to be strengthened in order to exceed by far the 1% of GNI in the medium term. In the short term, we will work to launch a major public investment plan for the ecological transition of at least 2000 billion euros over the decade, thanks to the in-depth reform of budgetary rules and the mobilization of a European budget with a permanent ecological investment and solidarity instrument. Today, 80% of the European budget is based on contributions from member states, a share that has been increasing in recent years, which reduces the budgetary power of the European Parliament. A tax on digital giants, a carbon adjustment mechanism at the borders, a tax on plastics, the strengthening and extension of the European carbon market to the maritime sector, a tax on kerosene for commercial aviation, an ambitious tax on financial transactions, must directly contribute to the European budget.

A majority of EU member states are opposed to increasing the European budget, except to deal with an exceptional, one-off economic crisis that endangers the eurozone, such as the coronavirus crisis.  Without the political will to create a sovereign European federal core, the chances of creating a significant European budget are practically nil, because each state wants to keep its financial means and capture the resources from new taxes to compensate for tax cuts and increased spending. 

Taxing multinationals

"We will raise the minimum tax rate on multinationals' profits to 25% throughout the European Union, as the European Trade Union Confederation is demanding. The agreement reached at the OECD on the taxation of multinationals is a first step, but it remains insufficient to effectively fight against tax optimization. In case of blockage by one or more Member States, we will propose to those Member States who wish to do so to adopt this rule via the enhanced cooperation mechanism. This will put an end to the race to the bottom between Member States. We will demand the harmonization of corporate tax in Europe, starting with the harmonization of its base before transferring part of its revenues to the European Union.

This is a good idea, but it has almost no chance of succeeding because several important states such as Germany are opposed to it for political reasons within the ruling coalition.
To carry out such a fiscal policy, a strong European political power of a federal type is needed.

.

A European climate budget

"We will defend a more ambitious share of the budget dedicated to the climate: today the targets of the multi-annual budget are 30% for the climate and 10% for biodiversity. We must reach at least 50% for both, and ensure that the rest of the budget respects the principle of not harming the environment. We will work with our European partners to create a European instrument for ecological investment and solidarity. It will support and accompany all the Member States in the ecological transformations to be carried out in order to achieve our climate objectives, but will also finance the infrastructures of the ecological transition that are of strategic European interest. This tool will be complementary to the financial leeway offered to Member States in the framework of the revision of the Stability and Growth Pact.
Putting an end to the Stability and Growth Pact in order to build the convergence of the States on renewed criteria in line with the requirements of ecological transition".

A European budget for the climate that comes on top of the national budgets in this field contributes to the dispersion of means and to the European inneficiency in the energy plan in particular, which is characterized by high prices, a very high dependence and a pollution that is not reducing quickly. 

For a European environmental treaty

"We will propose the signature of a new European environmental treaty that will give legal value to the protection of the environment, health and biodiversity and to the respect of planetary limits, superior to that of economic decisions and the functioning of the market. It will anchor the precautionary principle at the European level, recognize the crime of ecocide and allow the penalization of environmental damage by transnational corporations. We will also implement the European strategy for biodiversity by setting up 30% of protected areas. We will not ratify free trade agreements until there is a complete overhaul of trade policy. European trade policy should no longer aim at trading more but should contribute to relocating production and aligning democratic, social, environmental and climate standards from the top down."

This is a good idea to strengthen ecological and European awareness, but it cannot have any notable effectiveness given the factual primacy of national constitutions and governments in these areas.

Amplifying the European green deal    

"France governed by the Ecologists will be a driving force in this ecological transformation of the European continent and will amplify the Green Deal reforms in all sectors. To become the world leader in ecological transition, the status quo is no longer allowed: Europe must reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by at least 65% by 2030. Free pollution permits for industry will have to be abandoned as of 2023. In compensation, a carbon adjustment mechanism at the borders will be defended and implemented to protect European industry from environmental dumping. We will gradually end the system of free CO2 allowances for companies. The derogatory system of CO2 emission permits for companies was initiated with the distribution of free quotas, according to a mechanism that was supposed to be temporary but which is still in place, thus weakening the incentive effect of the system. We will gradually put an end to this system in order to put a price on carbon in all sectors of the economy. We will make Europe a sovereign energy continent by developing renewable energies. Renewable energies will have to reach 50% of the energy mix by 2030. We will promote the idea of direct investments by the Union to renovate the energy needs of the poorest homes. We will organize the withdrawal of synthetic pesticides by 2035 for the entire European continent, including imported products. We will not renew the authorization of glyphosate in 2022, its use will be banned throughout Europe and for all imported products, thanks to the implementation of mirror measures at the EU's borders.

These very ambitious objectives cannot be achieved without a European federal state capable of leading an industrial policy and an environmental policy unique in Europe

Towards a social Europe

"We want to make the fight against poverty one of the priorities of the European Union (EU). In particular, we will defend an ambitious directive on minimum wages, as well as a directive on a guaranteed minimum income, and we will put an end to unpaid internships. We will support initiatives to regulate platforms and give their workers equal rights with employees. We will mobilize European funds so that they can be used to fight against poor housing and especially fuel poverty. We will commit ourselves to maintaining the European fund to help the most deprived. We will bring forward a directive on gender equality in companies that includes binding targets for equal pay, parity in the management bodies of large companies and sanctions for non-compliance with equal pay. We demand a binding and enforceable European Social Rights Framework. We will push the European Union to adopt a constitutional framework that promotes the fight against poverty and inclusive economic development.

These are good proposals, but they would be more easily achieved with a European federal state.

Towards a Europe of health.

"The Covid 19 pandemic has shown that health issues know no borders. The European Union (EU) must encourage and help Member States to guarantee universal access to health services, including mental health services, in particular by combating medical deserts. This European policy must include an important component concerning prevention and environmental health. Finally, European cooperation must be articulated with the World Health Organization (WHO)/Europe".

These are also good proposals, but they would also be more easily realized with a European federal state

Towards a Europe of rights

"We will ask for the activation of the procedures provided for in Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union in case of violations of the rule of law, as is the case for example in Poland and Hungary. We will propose that the right to abortion be included in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. France will support and even welcome any European citizen who, as a victim of discrimination, is not defended by his or her State, or people who do not yet have access to abortion in their country. In order to unify the protection of rights in Europe and to harmonize their development, we will defend the accession of the European Union as such to the European Convention on Human Rights. Finally, we will defend the adoption of a European regulation on the independence of the media and propose to strengthen the European Union's Media program."

These are good ideas

Towards a humanist Europe

"We will put an end to the outsourcing of borders. We will put an end to outsourcing migration agreements with countries like Turkey and Libya, which are abusive to the people concerned. We will break with the Dublin III Regulation and with the deleterious logic of sorting at the borders, we will organize a mechanism of relocations between Member States taking into account the effective links (extended family and linguistic links) and the aspirations of asylum seekers. We will support a recast of the European border and coast guard agency Frontex. Instead of participating in refoulements at borders contrary to international asylum law, operating in third countries and repatriating illegal migrants, its activities should be refocused on sea rescue and humanitarian operations. They will be monitored by the European Parliament, in particular in the area of respect for human rights, international law and its duty of vigilance and alert regarding the illegal refoulement of migrants. We will renegotiate the migration agreement between France and the United Kingdom, which - under the guise of "making it impossible to cross the Channel" - leads to the shipwreck of our values and constitutes a tremendous boon for smugglers. We will strengthen the humanitarian search and assistance actions of Frontex at sea and support civilian and NGO boats, in accordance with international maritime law."

These proposals are demagogic and would make it impossible to defend European borders against illegal immigration. 

A Europe of peace

"We will support the strengthening of the European Union's development policy, doubling its budget and focusing it on the fight against climate change (mitigation and adaptation), the protection of fundamental rights, the fight against poverty and the promotion of gender equality. In an increasingly troubled global context, the European Union must impose itself as a major player in the service of renewed multilateralism, peace, fundamental rights and the fight against poverty. To do so, the ecologists defend a reinforcement of the diplomatic capacities of the European Union, by facilitating in particular the adoption of non-military measures such as targeted economic sanctions, customs duties, control of capital flows. We also want to strengthen military cooperation at the European level, with a greater number of external missions conducted by the European Union."

Increasing the EU development budget while each member state keeps its own development budget will contribute to the inefficiency and dispersion of European development aid. 
To pursue a policy of sanctions without having the military power to do so would place us in a situation of increased dependence on the United States, which remains the only credible protector of the Europeans.
Developing military cooperation between European countries is useful, but mainly to prepare the minds and institutions for the creation of a European federal state capable of ensuring its own defense. 

Providing Europe with a real foreign policy

"The Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) has ambitious objectives but remains limited by the difficulty of reaching agreement among the 27 Member States of the European Union. We will defend a strengthening of European diplomacy by increasing its means and by putting an end to the unanimity rule, so that decisions can no longer be blocked by a handful of Member States. We will support a stronger role for the European Parliament in defining the EU's diplomatic line. Any external intervention on behalf of the EU will have to be submitted to the European Parliament for approval."

The European states will not accept to move to majority rule in foreign policy because each state and each administration wants to defend its particular interests. In order to create a single European foreign policy, it is necessary to create a European federal core through the will of the citizens.

The European Parliament is not in a position to impose its authority on the member states, especially on foreign policy issues. 

Given the absence of a credible European federalist project to found a European federal state with a small number of states, Federal Europe does not give voting instructions for this presidential election. Federal Europe nevertheless invites voters not to vote for the candidates Marine Le Pen, Jean-Luc Mélenchon, Eric Zemmour and Fabien Roussel because their program of national tension represents a threat to the security and prosperity of French citizens and would set back the mental and institutional construction of federal Europe. ​


Emmanuel Macron's program and Europe

Emmanuel Macron recently presented his political program and he spoke of a more independent France in a stronger Europe. This is a positive development, since a strong Europe needs a federal type of unity. 

How can this program be useful for the progressive realization of the federal unity of European countries, which 58% of the French consider desirable? (Odoxa survey December 2021)  

The presidential candidate Emmanuel Macron, supported by the center-left political party LREM, proposes the following measures in particular:

Institutions

Introduce a dose of proportional representation.
This would dangerously increase governmental instability in a country that is characterized by sudden changes in public opinion and changes in the ideas of the elites. 
The creation of territorial councillors, who will sit on both the regional and departmental councils, is costly and inefficient. The departments must be abolished. 

Social and labor

Increase the legal retirement age to 65 years oldThis is a necessary reform taking into account the demographic evolution of France and it would take into account long careers, disability and hardship.
introduce a minimum pension of 1,100 euros and abolish special schemes (EDF, RATP...) for new entrants. This is a good measure
Simplify and make more advantageous the cumulation of employment and retirement and create a support service for senior workers to pay volunteers close to retirement who wish to share their experience with society. These are good ideas. 
Triple the amount of the "Macron bonus" This can be paid by companies to their employees, without charges or taxes, and represents up to 1000 euros or 2000 for people earning up to three smic. It is useful
Mandatory profit-sharing scheme in companies paying dividends. This is also a good idea
Make the compensation of the directors of large companies dependent on the respect of environmental and social objectives. Also a good measure.
Renovate at least 700,000 homes per year over five years. This is necessary
Recipients of the Active Solidarity Income (RSA) will be able to work fifteen to twenty hours a week in exchange for this minimum social benefit. This is useful to facilitate integration. 
Continue the youth commitment contract, which defines obligations (support, training) in exchange for a financial allowance of 200 to 500 euros, over twelve months. This is necessary to improve the condition of young people.
Encourage the maintenance of elderly people at home: transformation of housing to avoid their departure in a specialized institution and two additional hours of support per week by home helpers. Good measure
Reform Pôle Emploi
Transforming Pôle emploi into France travail, a one-stop shop bringing together skills assessment, training and job search services, is a good administrative measure
Systematize testing in large companiesThis is necessary. 
Extend the public depositThis is useful in order to facilitate access to housing while sanctioning bad payers 
Extend the Culture Pass to young people, currently open to 14-18 year olds. Good idea.
 
Education and research

Reintroduce math in the core curriculum and more sports.
Increase the budget allocated to basic researchThis is useful but it is not sufficiently effective without a European research policy steered by a European federal government. 
Strengthen the autonomy of universities to make them fully-fledged research operators and allow them to be more attractive. This is essential in the context of the CAP.
Increase teachers' salaries and give them more pedagogical freedom while mobilizing more teachers. Good idea, necessary

Health

Establish a system of unique medical referents. Set up a system of referents to perform simple acts such as prescription renewals by a nurse or a pharmacist. Generalization of medical assistants to save time for city doctors, development of teleconsultation.It is useful

Immigration

Toughen access to residence permits by making them conditional on "a French language test and a real professional integration process. Not renewing visas for nationals of countries that disturb public order and deporting them. Making the granting of visas conditional on the collaboration of States in terms of return to the territory. Good measures
Facilitate the deportation of people whose right to asylum has been deniedThis is necessary

Justice

Hire 8,500 magistrates and overhaul the penal code to reduce delays in justice. It is necessary
No GPAC authorization - can be justified
Do not legalize cannabisDo not legalize cannabis, medicalize it. 

Defense

Increase the army budget to 50 billion per year by 2025This will not be effective enough without a European army led by a European federal government which would be the only one able to defend Europe and intervene in the Middle East

Industry and agriculture

Invest massively in agricultural independence, especially in the production of proteins. 
It is necessary
Invest 30 billion euros in the sectors of the future (digital, cloud, quantum, artificial intelligence) This will be ineffective without a European industrial policy. ....
Taxation
Increase the inheritance tax allowance to 150,000 euros for direct descendants. This can be justified because it concerns the middle classes but it reduces equality of opportunity.
Reduce taxes for couples living together.Good measure.

Energy and ecology

Invest in both nuclear and renewable energies to produce "more decarbonated electricity "Have the State invest in the construction of 6 nuclear reactors of the EPR 2 type by 2050, study the construction of 8 more EPRs and extend the life of all reactors that can be extended beyond fifty years. This is necessary to be able to quickly reduce CO2 emissions which is the most urgent problem
Build fifty offshore wind farms by 2050This seems necessary.
Leasing electric carsGood idea
Create 100% French green industries, without recourse to exports, in strategic energy and ecological sectors: wind, solar and electric vehicles. Without a European industrial policy, this will be costly, and has little chance of succeeding in the face of foreign competition 
Defending a carbon tax at the borders of EuropeThis tax will be very difficult to implement given the opposition of China and the United States in particular and will be very difficult to calculate.

Europe

Reforming the Schengen area and strengthening FrontexThese measures are insufficient and ineffective in the fight against illegal immigration in Europe without a European federal government in charge of Europe's borders
​
Emmanuel Macron's program has many good ideas, but it does not address the major industrial, ecological, diplomatic and military challenges facing France and Europe. Despite words that could encourage European federalism, this program does not really advance the construction of a federal Europe, which has become necessary for obvious strategic and economic reasons.​


The program of Jean-Luc Mélenchon and Europe

What is the program of candidate Mélenchon concerning Europe and how can it be useful for the progressive realization of the federal unity of European countries, which 58% of the French consider desirable? (Odoxa survey December 2021)  

The presidential candidate Jean-Luc Mélenchon supported by the left-wing political party La France Insoumise proposes to remain within the framework of the European treaties but wants to profoundly change the European and international policy of France

He mainly wants to:

To leave the integrated military command of NATO and the Atlantic alliance.
This would weaken the defense of the European territory because NATO is the only organization capable of effectively defending this territory thanks to the interoperability of the armies obtained through the integrated military command. Leaving the Atlantic Alliance would marginalize France even more, because since 1945, it is the United States that ensures the defense of the European continent through this alliance and through its relationship with Germany.  

De-globalization with a protectionism of solidarity
If it is useful to relocate certain strategic productions and to protect high value-added industries, international trade is a necessity to reinforce economic growth in developed and emerging countries. 

The end of European defense
The Europe of defense, it is mainly the common armament projects which allow to perpetuate and develop the industrial and technological base of European defense and cooperation between certain services (cyber, intelligence etc.) via agencies. Putting an end to these projects in order to relocate the production of armaments to France alone would be detrimental to the quality of armaments, would increase their production costs and would make certain equipment inaccessible to France, especially in the space and aeronautics fields. 

Develop a French foreign policy that is independent and not aligned. 
Since 1945, France has been geopolitically marginalized in Europe, while Europe naturally remains the decisive economic and security zone for France. To recreate a French diplomatic and military autonomy as before 1939 is illusory. 

Strengthen the UN as a reference point for international policy
the UN does not have sufficient legitimacy or the political will to impose its authority on the great powers, as the wars in Kosovo, Iraq, Iran and Ukraine have shown. 

Cooperate as a priority with Africa and the Brics.
France does not have the means to propose alone an attractive cooperation for these countries in front of the superpowers and the great powers. 

The proposals of candidate Mélenchon are therefore dangerous for the security and prosperity of European and French citizens. They would weaken the EU by the Franco-French theme of this program and would make more difficult the emergence of a federal Europe which is however essential to ensure the independence and prosperity of Europeans.



Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

The program of Marine Le Pen and Europe,

First of all, a point on the issue of heavy weapons deliveries to Ukraine by NATO. In order to launch powerful counter-attacks to stop the advance of the Russian forces and then to push back the Russian forces, the Ukrainian army needs modern fighter planes and armored vehicles. Naturally, Russia is opposed to such deliveries, making it known that countries that deliver heavy weapons will become belligerents in its eyes. 

What can Russia do against NATO? Attack part of the territory of the Baltic States or other European countries, while it is facing major military and logistical problems in Ukraine. And this attack would generate a determined conventional response from NATO, which has a very clear air superiority over Russia.

Vladimir Putin may also decide to strike the NATO military installations involved in these deliveries with conventional missiles. But this would expose Russia to retaliatory strikes on Russian military installations that support the invasion of Ukraine.

It is therefore unlikely that Russia will embark on these adventures. If, on the other hand, NATO does not provide heavy weapons to Ukraine, this will be interpreted as a sign of weakness and may encourage further Russian military adventures.
 
Marine Le Pen proposes to change the main diplomatic orientations of France, without however wanting to leave the European treaties.

Within the framework of the EU, the candidate of the Rassemblement National wishes to

To leave the integrated command of NATO and to rebuild the cooperation with the USA in a way more favorable to France
This would weaken the defense of European soil, as the armies of the Atlantic alliance need the interoperability provided by the integrated military command to function properly. France does not have the means to put pressure on the US because the US controls the defense of Europe through its alliance and its tutelage over Germany. The only way to defend French interests against the US is to do so at the European level and therefore through the power of a European federal government. 

Establishing a strategic and industrial partnership with Russia
If France allies itself with Russia at the industrial and strategic level to the detriment of Germany, it will not only have to face German opposition but also that of the United States.  Under these conditions, France will be the great loser of this change because the industrial and military power of the Americans and the Germans exceeds by far that of the French and the Russians. 

Putting an end to the Franco-German pairing in matters of armaments and industry 
This will accentuate the French and European industrial decline. 

Develop commercial, diplomatic and military links with Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Morocco, Libya, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and India in particular.
France cannot develop these ties under good conditions because it cannot compete directly with China or the United States.  It needs the tacit support of a superpower to have access to these markets in an auxiliary way. If, for example, France can sell Rafales to the United Arab Emirates to equip part of their combat aviation, it is because the military protector of these Emirates, namely the USA, agrees.   

The European and international program of Marine Le Pen therefore endangers the security of Europeans and French people and would be detrimental to their fundamental industrial and strategic interests. 

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

Pécresse's program and Europe

First of all, a point about the war in Ukraine. In this war, Russia relies on China, in particular to face the Western sanctions. It is therefore counterproductive to antagonize China on certain issues, such as Taiwan. It is necessary to create diplomatic room for maneuver with China in order to put effective pressure on Russia and not to further cement the informal alliance between these 2 countries.  

The first round of the French presidential election will take place on April 10. This election is important for the future of the European construction since the German government proposes to gradually build a federal Europe. What are the candidates' programs and how are they useful for the progressive realization of the federal unity of European countries, which 58% of the French consider desirable? (Odoxa survey December 2021)  

Valerie Pecresse, supported by the conservative French party LR, proposes the following measures: 

Europe . 
Continue with the current confederal system of the EU but strengthen European defense. 
European defense cannot be strengthened in a single European diplomacy and without a European government responsible for defense and diplomatic issues. 
This conformist and comfortable position of the LR candidate does not allow to solve the economic and military problems of the French and the Europeans.

Family policy
Revaluation of family allowances
Bonus of 900 euros per child per year
These measures can be useful to boost the birth rate in France. 

Social policy
Income for young workers 670 euros with 1 training activity. This is an interesting idea to improve professional training. 
Abolition of inheritance tax. It is useless and costly for the state budget
Increase of the income of the doctors with consultation at 30 euros: Clientelist measure 
Retirement pension of at least 1 smic net per month. Useful measure to improve social justice and the situation of poor pensioners 
Increase of 10% over 5 years in net salaries. The increase in salaries is necessary but it may cause an increase in prices if capital income is not taxed to finance this measure
National youth bank to finance studies and projects. Useful but dangerous if it leads to refusing applications for short-term profitability considerations, which is often the case in the private sector.  

Education
Freedom of recruitment of teachers and adaptation of the pedagogical project. This is desirable to improve the quality of education 
10,000 additional teaching positions and a public tutoring service. 
2 more hours of French and 1 more hour of math per week

Penal policy
20,000 additional prison places. Necessary to reinforce penal efficiency and improve the situation of prisoners.  
Lowering the age of criminal responsibility to 16. There are already penal provisions to deal with juvenile delinquency. 
5 billion euros for law enforcement. Useful to reinforce their presence on the ground.  
9 billion euros for justice. Useful to make Justice more efficient. 

Housing
Priority social housing for frontline workers in their municipality
30% limit of very social housing per municipality.
These are interesting measures to improve social justice

Immigration
Social aid and family allowances for foreigners with more than 5 years of residence.   
Immigration quotas voted by the parliament
Charters for deportations
These measures are useful to improve integration 

Agriculture
Local preference in public food orders for school, hospital and administrative catering.
This is a good idea.   

Valérie Pécresse's program includes some good ideas but it does not respond to the major challenges that France and Europe must face in the industrial, ecological, diplomatic and military fields. And above all, it does not make it possible to advance the construction of a federal Europe which has become necessary for obvious strategic and economic reasons. 



Week 9, Year 2022

Europeans and the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Russia has launched a military operation to overthrow the Ukrainian government.  
The Ukrainians have short-range anti-tank and anti-aircraft weapons and a large and fairly well-trained army.
The main objective of the Ukrainian government should be to avoid annihilation of its ground forces by waging mobile defensive warfare, especially to plug gaps in the defensive posture or to escape encirclement. This will allow the struggle to continue as long as possible and thus place Russia in a very difficult situation thanks to very harsh economic sanctions coupled with prolonged Ukrainian resistance. 

After the fall of the Ukrainian government, which is likely to occur due to the air and armor superiority of the Russian forces, a pro-Russian regime will probably be installed. This Moscow-backed Ukrainian regime will be totally rejected by the population because the population is fundamentally committed to the free determination of Ukraine and to Russia's non-interference in Ukrainian affairs.

Since large quantities of weapons and many military structures will remain available after the fall of the current government, there is a good chance that a low- to medium-intensity insurgency will continue for a long time to fight the war of liberation against the Russian invader. This insurgency will cause casualties, reduce Russian determination to occupy the country and increase international sanctions against the Russian occupier. Under these conditions, it is doubtful that Russia will be able to stay in Ukraine indefinitely, which would be necessary to prevent the overthrow of the hated pro-Russian regime. 
The Americans and NATO did not succeed in dissuading the Russian attack. To do so, it was probably necessary to make the Russians understand that NATO air forces or, failing that, American air forces will defend the Ukrainian territory, as Soviet pilots defended the territory of North Korea in 1951. Or else it was necessary to create a Ukrainian air force with bases secured by anti-missile missiles and equipped with at least 300 Western 4th generation aircraft. All this the USA did not do because the Russian threat in Ukraine is not vital for their security and because Russia does not represent a global threat anymore.  
The European countries in this case, especially France and Germany have been totally unable to contribute to protect Ukraine by providing it with weapons in sufficient quantity and quality before the Russian invasion, especially anti-aircraft and anti-tank. For Germany it is the consequence of its pacifist policy of non-delivery in crisis zones and its dependence on Russian gas. For France it is perhaps to avoid being aligned with the American position and to avoid provoking Russia, with which it has common allies in Libya.

This strongly discredits the European, French and German protection of the Baltic countries, Poland and Romania. 

This structural weakness of the two main European countries in relation to Russia cannot be easily overcome in each of the two countries separately.  

France cannot alienate Russia if it wants to continue to play its traditional but illusory role as an independent power against the USA. And Germany is too weak militarily, even with a defense budget of 2% of GDP, to take the risk of provoking the Russians in Eastern Europe, which would have serious consequences for its trade and would jeopardize its investments and Russian gas deliveries. This is also the case for France, but to a lesser extent, because its economic interests in Eastern Europe and Russia are more limited. 

The result is a complete dependence of the Europeans on the USA for the defense of Eastern Europe, which of course prevents the Europeans from strengthening their arms sales in Europe, from reinforcing their autonomy, from increasing their power and from correctly defending their interests, notably commercial, against the USA. 

But the American protection of Eastern Europe will necessarily be further reduced with time, since the USA is confronted with serious social, political and budgetary problems, since it has to face China in the field of trade and technology. This gradual reduction of American protection will be all the more rapid as the Europeans remain divided and unable to take in hand an important part of their defense needs because the USA, notably for electoral reasons, do not want to find themselves in the front line against Russia in a war that is not really theirs. 

 If the Europeans do not create a federal European republic, especially with the French and Germans, in order to be able to set up a single European army and diplomacy and to have a single, and therefore effective, energy policy, they will not be able to defend Eastern Europe when it comes to doing so. In particular, when the Americans decide that the burden becomes too heavy to bear and presents too many risks compared to the disadvantages of a Russian takeover of certain countries located in Eastern Europe, as was the case in Eastern Europe in 1948, in Vietnam in 1975 or in Afghanistan in 2021.

And only a European federal republic could, thanks to its single European government, decide to conduct European air strikes against separatist or Russian forces in Ukraine, if the Ukrainian government so wishes and if the situation justifies it, or could considerably strengthen the Ukrainian air force. 
​ 
Week 8, Year 2022

The problem of financial transfers between countries in the euro zone

Net importing countries within the zone transfer capital and taxes to net exporting countries. This happens through the taxation of the profits of exporting companies and taxes on the consumption of their workers, which accentuates the budget deficit of debtor countries, reduces their consumption and weakens their industrial fabric.
These transfers to creditor countries cause social and political unrest that fuels the rejection of the U, nationalist parties of the right and chauvinist parties of the left.

To remedy this problem, some people want to set up a vast investment program to organize financial transfers to debtor countries that will make it possible to revive activity and increase the tax revenues of these countries.
The problem is that financial transfers to debtor countries via investments necessarily encourage their economic, industrial and fiscal mismanagement by loosening their economic constraints. With financial transfers, the governments of debtor countries become less and less capable of fighting their excessive deficits and administrative inefficiencies, because these tasks are always politically difficult. The increase in the debt of European debtor countries as a proportion of their gross domestic product before the COVID pandemic and since the introduction of the ECB's debt purchase program shows this. 

Some believe that the European Commission, especially under pressure from creditor countries, will be able to prevent mismanagement, especially through sanctions in case of misuse of allocated funds or lack of seriousness in the management of their public finances. This is not realistic. To prevent the implementation of sanctions for excessive deficits, a qualified majority is needed in the European Council. This qualified majority is easily obtained, given the small number of creditor countries. Therefore, no fines have ever been imposed on countries with excessive deficits. 

Moreover, even if fines were imposed, it is unlikely that the countries concerned would pay them. This is because the European Commission has no authority over the states and it is always politically useful to refuse to pay a fine imposed by the Commission. The European Council cannot use financial police forces or armed forces to force a European country to pay.

Finally, unlike the relationship between the IMF and indebted countries, many European countries are "too big to fail" for the eurozone and therefore cannot be encouraged to improve their public finances and international competitiveness by threatening to exclude them from the eurozone. This is notably the case for Italy and France. The ESM (European Stability Mechanism) financial program was able to intervene in Greece, Spain, Portugal and Ireland but with very little effectiveness on the international competitiveness of these countries.
It is therefore understandable why creditor countries such as Germany or the Netherlands do not want to organize massive financial transfers capable of compensating for the very large imbalances between creditor and debtor countries in Europe.

This makes the financial situation of the eurozone uncertain and fragile, which increases the cost of the European debt and further reduces the economic room for manoeuvre of European countries. In this situation, it is the ECB that is regularly called upon to plug the gaps in the financial credibility of the European debtor countries by buying back securities issued by these countries. But this also encourages mismanagement, as in the case of the Greek debt crisis with the ECB's purchases of Greek debt from 2001 to 2011 to keep Greek interest rates artificially low and allow the Greek government to get into debt easily. 
 
So we hope to reduce the competitiveness gap between European countries. But, apart from a few marginal adjustments, each European country is seeking to strengthen its competitiveness in order to face global competition. The differences in competitiveness between European countries will therefore not disappear, especially since these differences in competitiveness are the result of a long and complex economic history. 
In order to organize financial transfers between debtor and creditor states in Europe, a federal European government accountable to taxpayers and to the financial markets is therefore indispensable. This is the only effective way to ensure the sound management of public funds in Europe and to perpetuate the euro zone. 

It is true that the Next Generation EU investment program has mobilized 750 billion euros, including 500 billion in subsidies. But this program is linked to the exceptional economic situation resulting from the COVID pandemic, which justifies an exceptional and one-off solidarity effort. This program does not therefore have any consequences for the sound management of public finances in Europe.


Week 7, Year 2022

Is European federalism really feasible?

It is often said that, given the differences in culture, mentality and language in Europe, a European federal state cannot be created or that a European federal state would not be viable.

This idea can easily be disproved by showing that a federal state is designed to respect cultural differences because its institutional organisation is designed to guarantee local sovereignties on all matters that are best dealt with locally. A federal state is by nature decentralised, which makes it perfectly adapted to cultural, linguistic, ethnic and religious diversity, as is the case in India and Switzerland.

It is also sufficient to recall that the opponents of the euro insisted on the differences in monetary culture in Europe and considered that a European central bank could not impose its authority in the long term. In reality, a European federal government whose creation would be approved by France and Germany in particular would be fully legitimate. It could easily impose its authority in areas that can no longer be dealt with locally, such as the army, diplomacy, industry and the environment.  

European federalism is therefore theoretically feasible, 
 To achieve it in practice, it will be necessary to proceed in stages.

The first step is for the French and German governments to set the goal of creating a European federal republic in the more or less long term. This will allow European federalism to be progressively strengthened in society as a whole and with public opinion.

The second step is for the governments and political forces that support the principle of the creation of a European federal republic to select the method for achieving this goal. Should there be majority voting on fiscal and defence issues in the European Council, should there be a sovereign European assembly, or should the Federal Republic of Europe be created with a small group of countries and if so with which ones? This will increase the credibility and strength of European federalist ideas in society.

The third step is to convince sufficiently powerful political forces that have already declared themselves in favour of federalism to focus their political programme and election campaign on the creation of a European federal state using the selected method. This requires permanent and thorough coordination between the federalist political forces in the main European countries in order to make European federalism credible in the eyes of the voters.  

Week 6, Year 2022

Matthieu Calame's book La France contre l'Europe.

The book La France contre l'Europe by Matthieu Calame published by Les Petits Matins is an important work to understand the logic and to know the realities of European integration.

Its main thesis is to recall that a confederal system of mutualized cooperation like the EU cannot survive without the will to create a European federal nation state responsible for the major issues that can no longer be dealt with by local European nations.

And the author shows that it is very often France, out of attachment to a dream of grandeur and an illusory post-imperial ambition, that blocks the evolution towards a solid and efficient European federal system while holding a Europhile discourse. This places the European citizens in an economic and military impasse.

It is effectively a question of French political and administrative elites preserving their diplomatic and military power by placing France at the heart of the EU confederal system (euro zone, Schengen) and by demanding European financial transfers without accepting a mutualization of political power. This is particularly so as not to lose control of the nuclear weapon and the permanent seat on the UN Security Council, which gives them the thrill of power. 

The book shows well the contribution of the USA to peace on the European continent, even if it is perhaps a little underestimated from my point of view because the author forgets to mention that it is the USA and NATO, by putting an end to the political and military rivalry between Europeans, which made possible the economic and monetary confederal integration in Europe. 

The author reminds us that France's refusal to leave its status of nominal winner of the Second World War and not enter a European Federal Republic on an equal footing with Germany bears the seeds of future conflicts and cannot be accepted by those who are true Europeans.

Thanks to this book, one understands how the European countries, in the absence of federal unity, will be divided between the Russian, Chinese and American spheres of influence and will resume their age-old rivalry. The author could also remind us that a federal union is also necessary to allow Europeans to manage their internal affairs properly, particularly in the areas of industry, research, the environment and immigration. 

We learn from this book that the feeling of belonging to Europe will be strengthened when there will be a European state that can crystallize the European nation, as in Switzerland, Italy or Germany in the last century. As Matthieu Calame rightly notes, there is a historical process of transferring local sovereignty to larger organizations, in areas that are better dealt with at a higher level. This constitutes a national progress that complements social progress. 

The author is therefore right to point out that the current system of oligarchic European Councils, which are not accountable to the voters, is not inevitable, and that this system of small and often ineffective compromises facilitates the task of pressure groups and aggravates the mistrust of citizens towards the European institutions and facilitates the task of populists and other local sovereigntists.  

Other arguments of the author seem to me to be more questionable because they seem to be more a matter of personal conviction than of a cold analysis of realities.   

First of all, the author does not distinguish between the notion of state and the concept of nation, which makes him say that there is no national cultural identity.

One cannot define the nation only as a population living on a territory administered by a state. One must also necessarily admit a certain cultural homogeneity within a state. Switzerland could not create a federation with Mexico, but it could do so with the EU. If knowledge is universal, the culture that corresponds to ways of living and thinking is necessarily diverse and particular. This does not prevent pluriculturalism, but these plural cultures are then close. This does not prevent multiculturalism either, but one culture is then numerically or socially dominant.

The author draws an equivalence between socialism and federalism. Many liberals or conservatives have been federalists, such as Jean Lecanuet, Winston Churchill and Konrad Adenauer.  He also believes that the Franco-German couple did not play a decisive role. Yet it was the Franco-German couple with the ECSC that started the process of European integration and unity.  

The verticality of power and a strong executive would be incompatible with federalism in a multicultural country such as Europe: one only has to look at the examples of Bismarck's Germany or contemporary India to see that federalism is compatible with a strong executive in a multicultural country. Bismarck's federal Germany did not speak the same language in the north and south of the country, and India's quasi-federal system concentrates considerable power in the hands of the prime minister through the majority vote system. 

Switzerland differs from Europe in size and responsibility. Without a strong power, as in the USA, Russia, China or India, which are as much if not more ethnically, linguistically or religiously diverse than Europe, Europe will hardly be able to maintain its territorial unity and its political coherence​


Week 5, Year 2022

Does France really need a federal Europe ? 

It is often said that the European Union is a good way for France to multiply its power by taking advantage of the single market, the single currency and European industrial cooperation, while maintaining its budgetary and military sovereignty. This would allow it to continue to play an important role in Europe and in the world thanks to its nuclear weapons, its permanent seat on the UN Security Council, its commitment to international law and the heritage of its colonial empire. 

Thus, by relying on the confederal system of the EU, France would be able to maintain its rank, thus satisfying the aspiration to greatness of the French and making possible France's independence from the USA. 

But in reality the European confederal system of the EU functions thanks to the American peace that the USA has established on the continent with NATO. Without this peace, Europeans would remain political and military rivals allied to different non-European powers for decades to come, like 19th century Italy before its unification.

However, the American peace in Europe is weakening. This is due to the relative decline in power of the United States and its significant political, social and budgetary problems.  France must therefore understand that the European confederal system is not viable in the medium term, since the United States will not want to defend a very serious economic competitor forever at the risk of its soldiers and its nuclear security against Russia, which is no longer a world superpower.

And since the European confederal system on which France relies cannot function if the USA withdraws from Europe, France must also understand that it will not be able to make confederal Europe an autonomous entity with respect to the USA. 

It should be added that the current confederal system based on a single territory and a single currency is not viable in the long term either. Without mutualization of European debts, which requires financial responsibility, the risks on the euro zone persist. But creating a permanent European debt and a significant European budget is a political prerogative that implies the creation of a European federal state. 

France must therefore gradually embark on the path of European federalism so that Europe becomes a solid reality, independent of the attitude of the United States. It must do so by first setting as its goal the creation of a European federal republic with limited competences and the budget to finance them. Once this goal is clearly established, it will be possible to discuss calmly the advantages and disadvantages of the various methods of achieving this goal.    

It is in the interest of French leaders not to overestimate France and not to overestimate the EU in order to be able to look at the realities of the European situation lucidly and thus avoid new tragedies in Europe.  

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

Week 4, Year 2022

The French and European federalism

We often hear that the French are suspicious of European integration and opposed to European federalism. 

This would justify not talking to them about the federal solution for Europe, at a time when the German government is proposing a federal Europe as the goal of European construction. 

In reality, the French are not particularly suspicious of Europe compared to the Germans. More than 60% of the French, as well as more than 60% of the Germans, want more European integration for major issues such as defense, diplomacy, environment and industry (Eurobarometer surveys). 

But only about 30% of French and German citizens want to give more powers to the EU because they think that the EU is inefficient and often deals with issues that do not concern it, such as social issues or labor law (Yougov polls).  Citizens therefore want another Europe, more powerful and efficient and less invasive.  A federal Europe would be powerful and would not need to deal with everything in order to ensure the cohesion of Europe and to give itself a reason to exist. It would therefore allow societal problems and labour law to be returned to the local European nations. 

The slight surplus of distrust in France (30% of the French want more power for the EU against 36% of the Germans) comes from the particular history of France, which through its nominal victory in 1945 and its nuclear armament to preserve a national ambition of independence tinged with grandeur. But almost all French people know that the dream of an independent France is a chimera in a highly interdependent Europe in a world dominated by the great powers in which one cannot use nuclear weapons except to defend one's territory.   

Moreover, the French are among the European peoples, along with the Germans, who are most in favor of a federal Europe. Nearly 25 per cent of French people and 30 per cent of Germans are in favour of European federalism. 30% of citizens in both countries are opposed and 30% are undecided. 

So there is nothing to prevent the spread and gradual strengthening of European federalism in France, with the objective of creating a European federal state. 

This pro-federalist stance is also crucial to changing the center of gravity of the political debate in a direction that is more favourable to European construction and progress in Europe, in order to defeat nationalism and populism. By defending European federalism, one mechanically marginalizes nationalism in terms of ideas and strengthens the legitimacy of the current European confederal system. 

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

Week 3, Year 2022

France, the United States and a federal Europe.

There is a conception of Europe that is quite widespread in France, which consists in thinking that the EU member states should create a European defence to establish, in stages, a European strategic autonomy as a complement to NATO. This European defense could produce a form of European sovereignty that would allow European states to do without NATO and the United States. Europeans would not need to set up a European federal state and give up the sovereignty of national states to become truly powerful and fully sovereign.   
This conception is unrealistic and has not produced any significant results since the creation of the European defense policy in 1999. It can also be used as a pretext to reject or slow down European federalism.  
A European defence based on separate and cooperating European states cannot work and cannot complement NATO. This requires the existence of a strong and legitimate European political authority, which has the necessary budget and the necessary political authority. A functioning European defence therefore requires a European federal state. 
European defence cooperation in Europe is only really useful to facilitate the transition to a European federal state by preparing minds and institutions.  As far as the cooperation of defence industries is concerned, it is useful to preserve as much as possible the European defence industrial and technological base, but this cooperation remains hampered by the particular interests of each State and by the lack of military credibility of the Europeans, which heavily handicaps their arms exports.   
And if tomorrow the United States withdraws from Europe and leaves NATO, which is possible, this will not facilitate the establishment of a European defence if there is no European federalist will. 

On the contrary, we will probably see the resurgence of geopolitical rivalries between European nations, each of which will find a protector or a main ally to choose from among the United States, Russia and China, which will stir up European divisions. The European construction based mainly on the single market and the single currency will dampen these rivalries at least for a while, but it will not make them disappear: the geopolitical interests of the States are distinct from their geo-economic interests and often take precedence over them.  In reality, it is the United States and NATO that ensure to a large extent the current unity of Europeans. The European geo-economic construction was made possible thanks to the security ́ and peace assured by the USA in Europe since 1945  
As for the USA, they have traditionally feared a politically united Europe that could compete with them and that would limit their commercial and military influence in Europe, the Middle East, Central Asia and the Indian subcontinent. 
Their policy has therefore been to maintain the political division of the Europeans by instantly focusing on the role of the Atlantic alliance for the defense of the continent and by refusing to support initiatives that aim to create an autonomous European defense. But the US has played a positive role in encouraging European economic integration to stimulate growth on both sides of the Atlantic and marginalize the extremist political forces that thrive on economic and social misery. 
This situation has changed with the emergence of China as a rival and with the internal social, political and fiscal difficulties that characterize the US today. China has a stable and effective political system, a large, educated, hard-working, disciplined and courageous population, and great commercial and national ambition. Its economic and military potential far exceeds that of the USA, unlike that of Germany or the USSR in the last century. 

In 1960 the US accounted for 40% of the world's GDP, by 2030 it will be 20%. In 1960, the American political institutions were very solid and the social protection of Americans was among the best in the world. Today the American political system is partly discredited and social protection (health, retirement, education, salary...) is clearly insufficient, which leads to a lack of manpower and a decrease in life expectancy. 
The USA therefore needs a partner who will not be an unconditional ally against China but who will ensure stability and security and limit Chinese influence in areas where the USA is unwilling or unable to intervene on its own: Middle East, Africa, Central Asia, Russian mode, Indian subcontinent and on issues where it cannot act on its own: climate, trade, investments. 
​
This will allow the US to fund social, health and infrastructure spending and to concentrate its resources in the Pacific and Latin America to be able to confront China in these regions.
Both Republicans and Democrats should understand this new situation. They could and should promote the emergence of a strong, federalized Europe, which is essential to ensure the stability of the international system and to prevent the world order from being organized by China.

This development is also necessary because the defence of Europe's margins, particularly in the Baltic States, is not of vital interest to the United States. They will therefore probably not always be ready to commit themselves fully with significant military means to the defense of this area. Europeans must therefore take charge of the defence of their territory, which requires a commitment to European federalism in order to create European hard power. This European hard power will also increase the European soft power (law, economy) by completing it and giving it credibility. 

Week 2, Year 2022

Review of 2021

I would like to wish you a very good year 2022 and the best health possible. I thank you for your interest in the ideas of FEDERAL EUROPE, for your support or for your remarks and comments.  

The beginning of the year is as usual the occasion to review the action of European countries and the European Union for the past year. This assessment concerns the 6 main areas of political life in Europe for the European citizens according to the Eurobarometers: 1/ the economic situation, 2/ international influence, 3/ the environment, 4/ health, 5/ security and 6/ immigration. 

1/ The economic situation of European countries has again deteriorated more than in most other regions of the world.

This is still mainly the consequence of the persistent coronavirus crisis and the lack of a European industrial policy. The European recovery plan remains insufficient, despite the intervention of the ECB, when compared to the American and Chinese recovery plans. Moreover, essentially national and local industrial policies are not capable of producing sufficient European champions and of effectively organizing research and innovation in Europe, despite some limited successes. 

As a result, production in the European Union grew in 2021 by only 5% after a decline of 7.6% in 2020, i.e. a decline of 2.6% for the period 2020-2021. In Germany the growth was 2.9% (after a decline of 4.6% in 2021) in France the growth was 6.3% (after a decline of 8%). In the United States, production growth in 2021 is 6% (after a decline of 3.4% in 2021), i.e. an increase of 2.6% for the two years. In Russia growth is 4.2% in 2021 (after a decline of 4.1%). In Turkey the growth reaches 9% (after a growth of 1.8% in 2021, but at the cost of too low interest rates that favor inflation) and in China the production increases by 8% (after an increase of 2.3% in 2021).In India the production increased by 9.5% in 2021 after a decline of 7.3% in 2020. (IMF figures).  

With a European federal government, the economic situation in Europe would be much better.  More European funding to support fragile economies through major European projects, a coherent European industrial policy and a mutualized research policy would make it possible to relaunch economic growth in Europe and avoid the technological downgrading of Europeans. 

The deteriorating economic situation in Europe also has social consequences. The weak European growth leads to a progressive deterioration of the standard of living of Europeans, to an increase in partial unemployment, and to a decrease in purchasing power. As local European governments are not subject to a federal European government capable of regulating market forces, the deteriorating economic situation also increases social and fiscal dumping in Europe.  Tax havens like Ireland continue to exist and the condition of the working poor in Germany has not yet improved. 


2/ The international influence of the European Union and the European countries has further decreased in the year 2021 in almost all regions and on almost all issues. This has serious consequences for exports, investments, security and the prestige of Europeans. 

Even if the international influence of the EU is not at the top of the concerns of European citizens, the influence of France for the French and the influence of Germany for the Germans remain important concerns, which therefore add to the expectations concerning the influence of the EU.   

The international influence of the European Union and European countries is decreasing first of all on a geopolitical level.  

In Ukraine, the Minsk 2 agreements are still not being respected and Russia is threatening to invade. It is the United States that ensures the protection of Ukraine with arms sales and instructors and by dissuading Russia thanks to NATO and the interoperability ensured by the integrated command of the Atlantic alliance. 

The EU, France and Germany are of course unable to protect Ukraine alone, which is necessary in order to allow this country to choose its diplomatic and military orientation freely. This free choice of Ukraine is necessary especially in view of the Russian policy of aggression in Crimea and in the east of Ukraine.  

A European federal government could create a European army capable of protecting Ukraine. It would also be able to guarantee the implementation of the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement for its economic part, while allowing a political and economic rapprochement of Ukraine with Russia on a fair and voluntary basis. 

The EU and the European countries are still very much divided on how to deal with Russia regarding economic cooperation (Nord Stream N 2), European political interference in Russia, the degree of European influence in the countries of the former USSR, the issue of NATO expansion and the level of risk posed by Russia. They are therefore not credible partners for Russia. As a result, Russia remains focused on China and sees Europe as a weakened and divided area that the US cannot defend forever and whose only policy is the end of Russia as a power. 

Only the European federal government can induce Russia to detach itself from China and move closer to Europe. 

The influence of France and the EU is declining in North Africa and the Middle East. Turkey, supported by the USA and Russia, is increasing its influence in all these areas. A European federal government would have the means to influence Turkey to conclude a mutual defense agreement to promote European interests in the Middle East and Central Asia.  

The influence of the EU and European countries is almost non-existent in Iran, Pakistan and India. Trade and security agreements with Iran and Pakistan are concluded by China. India continues to be isolated by Chinese policy in Burma, Nepal, Bhutan, Bangladesh, Maldives, Sri Lanka, Pakistan and on the Sino-Indian border. It is the USA that is developing military cooperation with India. 

Only a European federal government would have the means to carry out a policy of investment and military cooperation with these countries to prevent China from dominating the Eurasian super continent and to replace or complement the influence of the USA in this area. 

European influence is also diminishing in Africa to the benefit of China and Russia, especially in economic matters but also in military cooperation, especially in Kenya, Mali, DRC, Tanzania, Angola and in African regional security organizations. Only a European government can confront China and its Russian ally in Africa, which seeks to secure its energy and mineral supplies.  

The international influence of the European Union and the European countries is still decreasing in geo-economic terms. 

However, the European Commission's Global Gateway project to invest in and develop high-quality infrastructure around the world, to complement and compete with the Chinese New Silk Roads and, to a lesser extent, the American B3W, should be mentioned.

But the Global Gateway project will not have sufficient public funds to finance investments in countries that are not always creditworthy according to IMF criteria but which are of great geopolitical interest, such as Egypt, Iran and Pakistan. Moreover, the Global Gateway project will not have the support of a European diplomacy and army, which will not allow it to impose itself in many important countries.  

The EU has been forced to grant the U.K. access to its internal market without any obligation to abide by EU rules, which puts it in a weak position in the face of Eurosceptic forces in Eastern Europe in particular and sets a dangerous precedent that may lead other European countries to leave the EU.   

The EU has concluded an investment agreement with China in 2020 that is a step in the right direction but is far from being adopted by the European Council and the European Parliament, given the divisions between European countries on this issue.   

Only a federal European government could negotiate on equal terms with China to facilitate European exports to China, to protect strategic European companies but also to quickly put in place an embargo against Chinese products that profit from the forced labour of Uyghurs.  

The EU and European countries are still not able to respond to US legal and trade sanctions properly, especially after the extraterritorial sanctions against Iran that prevent European companies from working in that country. 

Only a European government that is independent of the US for its defense could retaliate and thus dissuade the US from taking trade sanctions against Europe.

3/ The decline in the intensity of the coronavirus crisis in 2021 has led to an increase in CO2 emissions of 30% compared to 2020 (source IEA)

The electrification of cars and heating systems in Europe is still very slow. Moreover, coal and gas continue to be used massively in 2021. The EU's environmental objectives are therefore unlikely to be met.

The reform of the Common Agricultural Policy in 2020 is unsatisfactory because of the lack of funding to clean up agricultural production. Furthermore, the food industry is still not properly regulated in Europe, despite useful efforts announced by the German Minister of Agriculture. This still leads to an increase in diabetes and health care costs. 

Only a European federal government could initiate the massive electrification of the economy through massive European infrastructure programs and clean up the food supply in Europe by strongly encouraging all European countries to act decisively. 

4/ The quality of the health system in Europe in 2021 remains insufficient because some countries still do not invest enough (Ireland, Slovenia...) or invest badly (France with hospitals still too small and administrative health staff still too large).

This can have serious consequences for all Europeans because the European zone is an integrated health zone given the single European market and the intensity of commercial and human exchanges in Europe. 

In 2020 the member states of the European Union decided to entrust the purchase of vaccines against the coronavirus to the European Commission in order to have a greater purchasing power. This is a step in the right direction. But since the European Commission is not elected and is not accountable, and since local European states intervene to direct its action, the effectiveness of the European Commission is poor. 

Only a federal European government could act effectively to protect the health of Europeans. And only a federal European government that is accountable to its voters and to its population could have a truly effective medical purchasing policy.  


5/ Security in Europe in 2020 was further penalized by the absence of a European intelligence service even though there were no notable terrorist acts in Europe. Terrorism was also absent in the USA, China, Russia and India.    

The absence of a European intelligence service makes it much easier for terrorists to act, because the internal security services of each European country do not have all the elements to identify terrorist groups. 

Only a European federal government could create a European intelligence service and could lead a European diplomacy to eradicate terrorism on European soil. 

6/ The European borders have not been protected against illegal immigration in 2021. 

European countries are each defending their own electoral interests. They are therefore not capable of distributing illegal immigrants among themselves and of putting in place a single procedure that guarantees the expulsion of those who do not obtain the right to asylum.  It is Greece and Italy that have to protect their borders and manage the refugees, while the refugees are mainly looking for Germany, the Benelux countries and France. 

It is therefore not in the interest of Italy and Greece to stop illegal immigrants. This explains why, despite the efforts of Frontex, the number of refugees in Europe in 2021 will still be much higher than in the USA, Russia or India.  

Only a European government could protect the European borders and reduce illegal immigration significantly.

In addition to this European balance sheet for 2021, all Eurobarometers still show a much higher level of satisfaction with the ECB than with the EU. This is due to the federal and therefore efficient character of the ECB, whereas the EU is an often inefficient confederal structure. 

The time has come to create a European Federal Republic, starting with a Franco-German Federal Republic, responsible for defense, diplomacy, industry, research and the environment. 
.
While 30% of the French and Germans are in favor of the establishment of a European federal government, and 30% are against it, some leaders in France and Germany still refuse this solution. This is due to their lack of vision, their lack of competence and their lack of political courage. This penalizes all European citizens and harms their economic and security interests. ​


Week 50, Year 2021

The German coalition agreement and European federalism in France

The German SPD, Greens and FDP have approved the coalition contract negotiated by the leaders of these political parties and Olaf Scholz has become Chancellor.

This coalition contract specifies that it is necessary to move towards the creation of a European federal state, either by increasing the European Parliament's own resources and powers, or with a group of European countries wishing to progress along this path.
This federalist will of the German government is an important step forward that must be echoed by the French, in order to create a European government, a European army, a European diplomacy and a European industrial policy. These four instruments are essential to make Europe effective and to prevent Europeans from falling behind.

What is President Macron's position on this subject as France takes over the EU presidency? Will the French president, who presents himself as a supporter of "European unity" and an advocate of a "powerful" and "fully sovereign" Europe, give concrete expression to his convictions by making a statement in favour of the German government's federalist intentions? It is necessary that he finally commit France, in principle, to the European federalist path, because this is the only reasonable path for France's future, for strategic as well as economic reasons.    

Some people believe that this will diminish his chances of re-election. But it is the far-right voters who will never vote for Emmanuel Macron who are fiercely opposed to federalism. Voters on the right, center and left are either in favour of or indifferent to a European federalist perspective for France. 
 
It is interesting to note that it is left-wing and center parties in Germany that have adopted this principled federalist position.  The question now is whether this declaration of principle will be followed in the short or medium term by a concrete project to move towards a federal state. This concrete project must necessarily take the form of a Franco-German federal republic with limited competencies, since a federal state with 27 states cannot be created in Europe at once and since the European Parliament cannot impose its authority on national parliaments.  

Perhaps the right wing will be more capable of giving concrete expression to European federalism by assuming an approach initially limited to France and Germany and by defending a European presidential regime, which is necessary to convince voters of the solidity and effectiveness of future European federal institutions. 
This would not be surprising. It was the German left in 1848 that initially wanted German federal unity, and the conservatives opposed it to preserve the sovereignty of their local nations. This was the case, for example, with the Prussian conservatives who sat in the Prussian National Assembly. They criticized the federalism of the liberal German parliamentarians and the democratic German parliamentarians in the German National Assembly in Frankfurt. 
​   
But the left demanded a constitutional monarchy of the parliamentary type for all of Germany at the same time. So it was the German conservatives who were finally able to realize German federalism in 1871 through a gradual geographical process based on a constitution with a strong executive.  It should be added that the left is not very comfortable with the concept of the nation today. To create a federal state, however, the consent of the people and indisputable political legitimacy are required. It will therefore be necessary to explain to the people that Europe constitutes a great nation that brings together local European nations.


Week 49, Year 2021

Xinjiang, the USA and Europe

Dear European citizen, dear member, dear supporter,

The policy of mass detention, forced labor and forced sterilization conducted by the Chinese government in Xinjiang is totally contrary to human rights. Some even consider these practices to be cultural genocide and are alarmed at the rapidly changing ethnic proportions in the province.

The Chinese government claims that it is fighting Islamist terrorism, which struck in Beijing and Xijiang a few years ago. But terrorism is always the product of a violent and militant minority. Fighting terrorism is therefore intelligence and police work against groups that advocate or condone terrorism. This has nothing to do with mass detention and forced labor of the population. In reality, Beijing is using the pretext of terrorism to reduce the Uighur identity, which is considered too powerful, and to combat Uighur separatism.

If we can understand the Chinese fight against Uyghur separatism, we cannot accept the Chinese policy of collective repression of Uyghurs. Fighting separatism means dissolving and fighting separatist political groups. It is not a policy of attacking family structures, fighting cultural traditions and disrupting social organization through home surveillance, sterilization and forced labor. 

The US has rightly condemned China's practices in Xinjiang. The EU and most European countries have done the same but this is not enough to change China's practices. An embargo on goods from forced labor has been established by the US and the Europeans must also move quickly in this direction.

The EU and European countries should also urge Muslim countries and countries with which they have important ties to condemn Chinese practices in Xinjiang to ensure that Beijing only fights terrorism and separatism by police and administrative means. This will allow the Uyghurs to practice their language and to know their history, traditions and religion. 

It would also be desirable for the Uyghurs to enjoy real autonomy and thus for their province to be truly administered locally, except for questions of defense, diplomacy and economic policy, which must remain the responsibility of Beijing and the Chinese Communist Party.   

With a European Federal Republic, Europeans would be more powerful and more united, and therefore less subject to Chinese pressure in this matter. They would therefore be able to take a firm stand against China on this issue, which today is far from being the case, as Chinese pressure is exerted against certain financially fragile or commercially dependent European countries. 


Week 48, Year 2021

Japan, the USA and Europe 

Dear European citizen, dear member, dear supporter,

Japan is the main ally of the US in Asia and an important trading partner for the US 

Japan's foreign policy and defense are under American control through the Japanese constitution which limits the armed forces to self-defense, through its renunciation of nuclear weapons and because of the American bases in Japan. 

American protection is fully accepted by the population. Nevertheless, some left and center parties believe that a more independent and neutral policy should be adapted, especially with regard to China, because economic relations with China have grown massively and will grow further.

If South Korea comes under Chinese influence, as is likely in the long run, Japan's economic dependence on China will increase. And a Chinese invasion will become theoretically possible from South Korea.

Of course, such an invasion would be very costly and risky, and the U.S. could support and reinforce the Japanese forces quite easily. On the other hand, a blockade of Japan would become much easier, and would be an effective pressure tool.  

It is therefore likely that in the long term Japan will adopt, under pressure from Beijing, a more balanced policy towards China, sliding towards a certain neutrality coupled with a strong capacity to defend its territory, rather like Switzerland in Europe until 1945. 

What should Europeans do in the face of this development?

Not to oppose the possible Sino-Japanese rapprochement, if China favors European commercial and strategic interests. Europeans should also oppose the massive rearmament of Japan, which cannot change the balance of power in Asia and which will provoke the hostility of other Asian countries, notably the two Koreas, if this rearmament is contrary to European interests.   

But given the military weakness of Europeans, their political divisions and their dependence on the United States for their security, this policy is out of reach for Paris, Berlin and Brussels. Only a European Federal Republic capable of ensuring its own defense without the help of the USA could conduct such a policy and could properly defend European interests in this matter. 

The time has come to create a European Federal Republic, starting with a Franco-German Federal Republic, responsible for defense, diplomacy, industry, research and the environment. 
.
While 30% of the French and Germans are in favor of the establishment of a European federal government, and 30% are against it, the leaders in France and Germany still refuse this solution. This is due to their lack of vision, their lack of competence and their lack of political courage. This penalizes all European citizens and harms their economic and security interests. 


Week 47, year 2021

Korea, the USA and Europe


The denuclearization of the Korean peninsula coupled with a pacification mechanism by reducing the armaments of the two Koreas thanks to the gradual convergence of the economies constitutes a realistic path for the future of the region.

To move forward on the path of denuclearization, a declaration of end of war would be welcome as North Korea claims to have nuclear weapons to deter a new American attack, the massive bombing of which during the Korean War has not been forgotten.

Once denuclearization and dialogue have been reestablished on the Korean peninsula, the two Korean states will remain independent and separate for a long time to come. But they could embark on intensive and lasting economic, commercial or even military cooperation. If a reduction in the North Korean military threat is obtained in exchange for security guarantees given by the US, this could lead the South Koreans and North Koreans to engage in an even faster process of pacification and convergence.

China by its importance for Korean exports and imports (for the North as for the South) and by its capacity of military pressure can favor this process, which is probable in the long term. Indeed, the South Koreans do not intend to initiate a rapprochement with Japan to the detriment of China Given the trauma left by the Japanese occupation. And the United States probably cannot, given its public opinion, fully engage with massive conventional means in a new Korean War that does not concern its vital interests, even if American interests in Korea are important. Finally, the South Korean government and the USA can hardly authorize the use of American nuclear weapons to restore the military balance of power given the existential risk for South Korea and the risk for the American bases in the Pacific.

For these reasons, China could gradually become the main arbiter of Korean policy and gradually become the main ally of the two Korean states. In addition, China's economic interdependence with the Korean peninsula will be strengthened by the RCEP free trade agreement signed in 2020, in particular between China, South Korea and Japan.

What should Europeans do in this situation?

The Europeans must continue to sanction North Korea because of its nuclear program while being ready to invest in this country if it abandons this program and approaches South Korea. But given their divisions, the Europeans cannot conduct an industrial and commercial policy adapted to defend their interests properly against South Korea and tomorrow against North Korea. The Europeans cannot adopt an independent position from the US on the Korean question either, given their diplomatic weakness.
 .
With a European Federal Republic, it would be possible to conduct an industrial policy to compete effectively with Korean products. It would also be possible to resist American pressures to be able to engage in an independent policy on the Korean question to better defend European geo-economic, geostrategic and geopolitical interests or to strengthen multilateralism when it is useful.

Week 46, Year 2021 

The China Sea, the USA and Europe

China and Russia are cooperating intensively in the economic, military, diplomatic and technological fields. It is therefore important to know what should be the attitude of Europeans towards China on major issues in order to be able to influence Russian policy, especially in Belarus. Indeed, Russia, for example, is doing nothing to stop the aggressive and intentional organization of migratory flows by Belarus to Poland, which constitutes a disproportionate response to the European economic and diplomatic sanctions against Minsk.

In the China Sea, Beijing is claiming almost all the islets, to strengthen its naval and air domination over its neighbors and to benefit from maritime mining and fishing resources. For their part, the other riparian countries (Vietnam, Philippines, Taiwan, Brunei, Malaysia, Japan) claim the islets which are close to their coasts.

These countries are trying to maintain their autonomy and their maritime interests vis-à-vis China by seeking the support of the United States, but they cannot provoke Beijing for reasons of deep economic interdependence and very marked military inferiority.

The Haie Arbitration Court considers that there is no tangible proof of a historical sovereignty of China over all the islets of the China Sea capable of legitimizing Pekin's claims But economic dependence riparian countries towards China and the relative military weakness of the countries of the region compared to Beijing is accentuated. The militarization of the islets occupied by Beijing by force, in particular against Vietnam in the Spratley Islands, will therefore continue.

The United States and its allies can hardly attempt to slow this process down, and the eventual reunification of Taiwan will allow the People's Republic of China to strengthen its military and diplomatic hold in the area dramatically, which will increase its military and economic influence over the United States. countries in the region.

But as long as Taiwan has not been attached to China, this area will remain contested for a long time and China will not have the means to achieve control over the entire China Sea. If the United States manages to delay the reunification of Taiwan and not lose face during this reunification, the Chinese stranglehold in the China Sea could be further slowed down.

What should Europeans do in the face of this situation?

Given their political division and their military weakness, the Europeans are too weak to intervene and cannot oppose China or the US on this issue and in this region.

On the other hand, a European Federal Republic could conduct a naval policy and an effective diplomacy in particular to obtain from China and the USA trade and security concessions in Africa as well as geoeconomic advantages in return for their policy towards the countries bordering the sea. from China.

The time has come to create a European Federal Republic, starting with a Franco-German Federal Republic, responsible for defense, diplomacy, industry, research and the environment.
.
While 30% of the French and Germans are in favor of the establishment of a European federal government, and 30% are against, the leaders in France and Germany still refuse this solution. This is due to their lack of vision, their lack of competence and their lack of political courage. This penalizes all European citizens and undermines their economic and security interests.

Week 45, Year 2021

Taiwan, the USA and Europe 

The Chinese government wants to reattach to mainland China the island that served as a refuge for Chinese nationalist forces in 1949.

China believes that Taiwan should be reunited with its territory, willingly or by force if necessary, especially if Taiwan declares independence.

For the USA, this connection must be done on a voluntary basis. And they are ready to provide the Taiwanese with the means to defend themselves against an invasion or against a Chinese blockade. They could also intervene militarily in these 2 cases.

Diplomatically, the US cannot both refuse to recognize Taiwan as an independent state, as it has done since the Taiwan Relations Act by refusing to establish diplomatic relations with Taiwan, and deny China the right to reunite that state. State to its territory, possibly by force.

An internal evolution of Taiwan towards independence could offer a solution to the USA but this is not politically and territorially acceptable for Beijing, which was then very probably using force. In reality the Americans had for 32 years, from 1980 to 2000, the military, economic and diplomatic superiority to be able to support the independence of Taiwan. They didn't and today it's a fight that is no longer relevant.

Militarily, the ability of the US and its allies to defend Taiwan without resorting to nuclear weapons is dwindling day by day.
 
It is very unlikely that the United States will commit its nuclear weapons, to defend territory which is not vital for its national security and which only allows it to maintain its influence and its system of alliance in the Far East. Even between nuclear powers, a conflict does not generally evolve towards the use of weapons of mass destruction as long as vital interests are not concerned. The Korean War in which the Soviet pilots were involved did not start a nuclear war. The border conflict between the USSR and China did not start a nuclear war. The Soviet government was not ready in 1962 to defend Cuba with its nuclear weapons and therefore withdrew the missiles from Cuba. Several limited clashes and localized wars have pitted China and India since these two powers possessed nuclear weapons, which is also the case for Pakistan and India.

There remains, however, the possibility for the USA to cover up with tactical nuclear weapons to restore the balance of power in their favor in the Taiwanese theater of operations. If the Chnois let it be known that this will result in a proportionate nuclear response on their part against Guam or other US bases in the Pacific, the US is unlikely to embark on this adventure.

Conventionally, the United States and its allies will very soon be greatly outclassed in the Taiwan and China Sea sector on land, at sea, under the sea and in the air. They will also be caught up by China in space and for cyber. In addition, China already has superiority in missiles and human intelligence. This makes possible a Chinese blockade of the island or an invasion of the island through a secure maritime corridor and through a protected exclusion zone around Taiwan.

Politically, American public opinion is today 50% in favor of American intervention to defend Taiwan. With the first losses and the first difficulties, this number will probably increase. Given the American politico-media system, this will weigh heavily on American strategic choices in Asia, which will then probably be reassessed, as they have been in Korea, Vietnam, and Afghanistan. Taiwan does not represent a vital stake for the USA, unlike Germany and Western Europe for which they are ready to actively engage in order to prevent this area from coming under the control of a hostile power.

What should Europeans do in this situation?

It is in the interest of Europeans to stay out of this conflict in which they have nothing to gain and for which a nuclear confrontation remains possible. It is also not in the interests of Europeans to export or defend non-presidential democracy in Asia, in particular if this leads to weakening the diplomatic position of Europeans in relation to China.

In addition, the Europeans are not in a position to defend Taiwan given their geographic remoteness and their military weakness. They cannot therefore change the course of events in the Far East even if they can implement economic sanctions whose scope remains limited and whose effects are double-edged.

On the other hand, with a militarily and diplomatically powerful European Federal Republic, the Europeans could play  a more important military and diplomatic role in Asia, in particular to encourage the Americans and the Chinese to get along as the British and the Chinese have agreed for Hong Kong. Such a solution would require efforts not only from the Americans but also from the Chinese. Indeed, the reunification of Taiwan with China could be postponed by several decades in order to be subject to a very gradual political process accompanied by local internal security guarantees intended to preserve the Taiwanese institutional system to which the local population is attached.

Week 44, Year 2021

The European energy problem


Rising electricity and gas prices across Europe are threatening social stability and economic recovery. This increase cruelly highlights the lack of efficiency of energy policy in Europe despite the efforts of the European Commission.

Moreover, the EU and the European countries are not able to agree on the course of action to be taken immediately: should we build up stocks of natural gas? Or should we simply subsidize consumers while waiting for the end of the rise in energy prices?

In reality, building up gas stocks or subsidizing consumers does not make it possible to correct a lastingly compromised energy situation, even if it is better than nothing.

Indeed, the energy situation in Europe is deeply worrying in all areas:

Firstly the prices: they are high for electricity and energy compared to the USA is worsened by the rise in the price of gas and oil and by the increase in European and world demand linked to technological developments. This weakens growth and living standards in Europe
Second, energy dependence on the outside: it is aggravated by the lack of investment in infrastructure. This places European countries and the EU in a weak position vis-à-vis Russia and the USA in particular.
Third, the high share of fossil fuels: this significant share is further increased by the phasing out of nuclear power in Germany. This discredits the European position concerning the reduction of CO2 emissions and the reduction of pollution.

This very bad situation is first of all the result of the inconsistency of energy resources in Europe. Production capacities are dispersed between nuclear, coal, wind, solar and biomass, therefore with increased costs. Purchases are made by each of the European states without coordination, which makes it difficult to negotiate under good conditions with exporters such as Russia, North Africa and the Middle East.

It is then the consequence of the lack of investment at the level of the single market for transport, industry and heating. This slows down the electrification of heating and transport networks, increases pollution and degrades Europe's energy dependence.

The dispersion of resources and skills between the 27 member countries of the EU + the European Commission, which make it impossible for the EU to put in place a coherent and therefore effective energy policy. Energy policy is the primary responsibility of each state and it cannot be pooled on a long-term basis without the will to build a European federation.

Only a European Federal Republic, in charge of industrial issues and therefore energy issues, can therefore be able to conduct a coherent energy production, purchase and investment policy in Europe to protect consumers and manufacturers.
The time has come to create a European Federal Republic, starting with a Franco-German Federal Republic, responsible for defense, diplomacy, industry, research and the environment.
.
While 30% of French and Germans are in favor of the establishment of a European federal government, and 30% are against, leaders in France and Germany still refuse this solution. This is due to their lack of vision, their lack of competence and their lack of political courage. This penalizes all European citizens and undermines their economic and security interests.

Week 43, Year 2021

L'après Covid  et la pérennité de la zone euro


On insiste beaucoup sur les subventions accordées aux pays débiteurs pour soutenir leur croissance et leurs finances publiques pendant la pandémie du Coronavirus. Ces transferts sont importants pour éviter une  récession dans les pays débiteurs qui impacterait nécessairement le reste de l'Europe, et pour  dissuader les investisseurs de délaisser la dette des pays débiteurs, ce qui entraînerait une hausse des taux et une nouvelle crise de la zone euro.

Si le green deal mis en place par la commission européenne sous l'impulsion de la France et de l'Allemagne  a permis d'éviter une nouvelle crise de la dette souveraine en Europe, il ne permet pas de traiter le problème de fond de la zone euro, à savoir  la divergence  financière et économique croissante entre pays créditeurs créditeurs du nord et pays débiteurs du sud.

Avec  la pandémie du Covid 19 qui a très durement frappé l'économie en Europe,  cette divergence s'est accrue dans  4 domaines économiques essentiels: le niveau d'endettement, la croissance moyenne, la balance commerciale et le pouvoir d'achat. 

Cette divergence existe depuis la création de la zone euro et des mesures ont été  prises pour réduire cette divergence, notamment par l'incitation des investisseurs privés via le plan Juncker à investir dans les pays du Sud et par l'achat massif de dette grecque par la BCE. Ces mesures ont largement échoué en raison de l'incapacité des acteurs privés à modifier les tendances macro économiques de fond et avec la fuite des investisseurs devant la dette grecque en raison du risque d 'insolvabilité grecque. 

Cette divergence persistante et croissante conduit les pays créditeurs à exiger des réformes de la part des pays du Sud, à demander une réduction des déficits de ces pays et à réclamer une politique plus restrictive de la BCE en menaçant parfois de sortir de la zone euro si leurs créances ne sont pas sécurisées grâce á ces mesures 

Elle conduit aussi à un mécontentement social dans les pays débiteurs du sud car  des régions entières se désindustrialise et perdent du pouvoir d'achat dans ces pays en raison de la concurrence de l'Allemagne et des pays du Nord. Ceci provoque au sud la volonté de s'affranchir des règles budgétaires, d'exiger des transferts, de refuser les réformes  voire de sortir de la zone euro. 

Ces deux mouvements en direction opposés dans au Nord et au sud de l'Europe conduiront nécessairement à une augmentation des tensions au sein de l'UE, à son inefficacité croissante, a sa paralysie,et  à son délitement. Ils peuvent aussi conduire à l'éclatement  de la zone euro, avec des conséquences économiques et financières désastreuses.

Si on ajoute ála fracture économique Nord Sud la fracture politique Est ouest en Europe liée à des appréciations différentes au sujet de la définition de l'Etat de droit, qui conduisent également á l'inefficacité et á la paralysie de l'UE, on comprend pourquoi l'UE est en réalité un système d'organisation dépassé et inefficace, même si il reste utile.


Il est nécessaire de passer à l'étape suivante de la construction européenne en créant une République fédérale européenne, franco-allemande pour commencer, afin de pérenniser la zone euro et afin de mettre fin aux dissensions sur l'État de droit. En effet, seul un Etat fédéral dispose de la légitimité politique et des moyens budgétaires et militaires pour faire régner un ordre juridique pleinement légitime et pour rendre impossible une sortie de sa zone monétaire.   


Le temps est venu de créer une République fédérale européenne, en commençant par une République fédérale franco-allemande,  responsable pour la défense, la diplomatie, l'industrie, la recherche et l'environnement. 

.

Alors que 30% des français et des allemands sont favorables à la mise en place d'un gouvernement fédéral européen, et que 30% sont contre, les dirigeants en France et en Allemagne refusent toujours cette solution. Ceci est dû à leur manque de vision, à leur manque de compétence et à leur manque de courage politique. Ceci pénalise tous les citoyens européens  et porte atteinte à leurs intérêts économiques et sécuritaires. 

Week 42, Year 2021

The rule of law and Eastern Europe

On October 7, 2021, the Polish Constitutional Court declared that the 3 main articles founding the primacy of European law over national law are contrary to the Polish constitution.

This decision should allow the Polish government, which has gradually placed the Constitutional Court under its influence, to delegitimize European decisions which sanction Poland financially, in particular for failure to respect the principle of independence of the judiciary.
But as the Polish Constitutional Court is not regularly composed, this decision will have very little influence on European judges and will not impress much on European public opinion.

And this decision will not prevent the European Council from taking measures of financial sanctions which are foreseen and which are theoretically justified given the extent of the attack on the independence of the judiciary in Poland.

However, European judges, the European Commission, Parliament and Council also have a responsibility in this case.

Indeed, the European Union is not a State and does not have a strong political legitimacy. It cannot therefore interfere in the constitutional principles and in the choices of society of European countries, beyond what can achieve consensus in these countries. The principles evoked by the Treaty on European Union and in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union are fully desirable, but their application must take into account social realities and be moderate.

In fact, in certain European countries, in particular in the Eastern European countries, certain points such as the degree of protection of minorities, the degree of pluralism or the nature of the independence of the judiciary are the subject of intense debate. On these particular points, which have consequences for the effectiveness of public action, we are not afraid to impose a legal order that does not have wide acceptance in societies.

A European Federal Republic will be able to make the necessary synthesis between the political culture of Western and Eastern Europe thanks to the feeling of European belonging provided by its existence. And only a European Federal Republic will have the legitimacy and political authority to settle the delicate questions relating to the degree of protection of minorities, the type of pluralism and the nature of judicial organization.


Week 41, Year 2021

European integration of the Balkans

The EU-Balkans summit should strengthen the membership prospects of the 6 Balkan countries which are not members of the EU: Bosnia, Montenegro, Kosovo, North Macedonia, Serbia and Albania. 

It is indeed necessary to accelerate and concretize this process even if all the Copenhagen criteria necessary to integrate the EU are not exactly fulfilled by these countries. Strengthening ties with these European countries is more important than waiting for perfect democratization in a region, namely southern and western Europe, whose political culture remains somewhat different from that of Western Europe. the west

Without rapid European integration, these countries will be more and more subject to non-European influences, particularly Russian and Chinese, which weakens the European position vis-à-vis these powers and which will create an area of ​​economic uncertainty with a strategic and military risk. in the heart of Europe.

Unfortunately, given the modalities of the EU enlargement process, which requires the consent of all member countries, the chances of bringing these countries quickly into the Union are low. It will therefore be necessary to develop as much as possible trade exchanges, investments, tourist visas, study visas and work visas as well as police and military cooperation thanks to the action of the EU and European countries, especially Germany and France. In particular, it is necessary to gradually integrate the Balkan countries into the European internal market and into the Schengen area.It is necessary to stabilize this region by offering a perspective different from that of nationalism which has triggered 4 wars in the Balkans since 1991.

The integration of the 6 Blakans countries into the EU would be greatly facilitated if there was a Franco-German Federal Republic. On the one hand, this European federal government would have the capacity to convince the other European countries to accept the accession of the Balkan countries to the EU, given the credibility of its military power and given its overwhelming economic weight. in Europe. On the other hand, a European federal government would be able to strengthen the attractiveness of the EU for these countries because Europe would no longer be just a market and rules of law. It would also become a power which gives collective meaning and which guarantees the future of populations.

Without the constitution of a credible European power, Europeans in the Balkans, but also those in the rest of Europe will increasingly turn to credible but non-European countries such as the USA, China or Russia to ensure their prosperity. and their safety. This will gradually lead to the division of Europeans, the gradual disintegration of the EU and the resurgence of their rivalries.


Week 40, year 2021

The result of the German elections and Euroconservatism

The German parliamentary elections have given a narrow majority to the Social Democrats who are able to form a coalition government. This narrow majority confirmed the slow but steady decline of the German conservatives. In 2013, they won 41% of the vote, in 2017 they obtained 32.9% of the vote and in 2021 they won 24.1% of the vote.

This decline is mainly the result of AFD's breakthrough since 2013. This anti-European and xenophobic party has managed to attract some of the conservative voters, rightly worried by the crisis in the euro zone and the influx of refugees. .

It is also the result of the strengthening of the liberals by right-wing voters. Indeed, these voters note the absence of a reasonable political offer based on cultural, economic and military strength. They are therefore gradually rallying to the ideas of the Liberals, or even to the ideas of the Social Democrats or the Greens.

This situation prevents the Conservatives from obtaining an absolute majority and causes them to lose the elections. This forces them to form a coalition government with the Greens or with the Social Democrats or it pushes them out of power. The negative effects of this new political situation are clear: the reduction in the coherence and strength of the German federal government's action, particularly in energy, digital, industrial and defense matters since 2013.

While the right-wing parties are in the majority in Germany, the CDU-CSU is less and less present in responsibilities due to its inability to obtain an absolute majority of seats in the Bundestag because of the AFD and, to a lesser extent, because of the FDP.

So under these conditions, how should the German conservatives envisage their future?

To answer this question, we must know how to recover the lost Conservative voters among the nationalists and the liberals.

AFD voters are attached to sovereignty and power, in particular through Germany's financial hegemony and Germany's control of its borders. They were disappointed by the growing financial irresponsibility in the euro zone which weakens Germany and by the inability of the European Union to protect its borders due to its political and territorial division.

To win back the majority of these voters, who voted for a long time for the CDU, the German conservatives must propose a European sovereignty capable of creating a European financial and military power responsible for its management and independent of the USA. Such a power must necessarily be endowed with a strong political authority and an assumed civilizational identity. It is therefore a Euroconservative program based on the creation of the European Federal Republic.

This program and its Euroconservative values ​​will gradually marginalize AFD because its unrealistic program centered on nostalgia for German power is not Coptic credible given the German dependence on the single market. a real European power, the nostalgia for independent German power will fade and lose its appeal to the voters.

This Euroconservative program will also make it possible to rally the conservative voters lost among the liberals because of the absence of a credible and reasonable sovereignist program, that is to say because of the absence of a European sovereignist program.

The notion of European power also has the advantage of strengthening the mobilization of conservative voters, who are overwhelmingly attached to the identity and power of Europe.

Obviously Euroconservatism supposes moving away from the traditional Atlanticism of the CDU in matters of security and defense, which is necessary since the USA no longer has any interest in defending European interests as in the days of the USSR, in the face of European countries which have become major economic competitors thanks to their monetary and trade union.

To give credibility to the Euroconservative and European federalist program, the German conservatives must set up a program, a working group and a timetable in common with the French conservatives with the aim of creating a Franco-German Federal Republic, the first stage of the Federal Republic. European.

It will be long and difficult, but it is their only way to save the Conservatives from lasting political marginalization.


Week 39, Year 2021

The credibility of American protection in Europe
 
The hasty withdrawal of the United States from Afghanistan casts doubt on the credibility of American protection since the United States is unwilling to support its allies by military means when the cost seems too high.

There is therefore a limit to the American will to defend their allies. and in particular their European allies. The USA, contrary to what most Atlanticists and liberals think, defends above all their national interests and not above all freedom in the world. For the USA the defense of freedom abroad must serve their national interests, otherwise they oppose it as in 1953 in Iran or they turn away from it as in Czechoslovakia in 1968.

What are the criteria that influence the credibility of American protection?

First of all, the importance of the threat to the United States. If the USA defended Western Europe against the Soviet threat, in particular by defending West Berlin, it is because the USSR represented a planetary threat and because it was capable of conquering Germany militarily. Today Russia does not represent a planetary threat and it is not in a position to invade Germany even if its expansionist will remains. Its ambition is to restore its influence in the countries of the former USSR, if possible by avoiding the use of force.

Then the cost of protection in man, material and capital. Even though Europe is a peaceful area in which the United States does not suffer any loss of life, the financial cost of its presence is significant.

Then the benefit of protection for the USA. We must recognize that the presence of the Americans in Europe makes it easier for them to sell their military equipment to Europeans and strengthens their diplomatic and economic influence over them.

Finally, the evolution of the mentality of political, administrative and media elites and of the population. The political and administrative elites, often linked to the arms industry, wish to maintain American influence in Europe. But they also want to make the Europeans more involved in the defense of the continent, while maintaining the control of the USA over their allies via their military preeminence and thanks to the political division of the Europeans. The American population, on the other hand, is less and less willing to ensure the protection of the European continent, which represents a leading economic competitor. Some politicians will therefore necessarily seek to take advantage of this reality which will only grow, as Donald Trump did.

Under these conditions, American protection in Europe is far from absolute. Certain scenarios may materialize in which the US will refuse to intervene as it refused to intervene in Hungary in 1956 or in 1998 in Kosovo. In the event of significant trade tensions between the EU and the US or in the event of differences over the Indo-Pacific zone between Europeans and Americans, the United States would probably refuse to actively defend European interests or European territory against or against Russia. to other powers.

For the USA, it is always the American interests that will prevail over the interests of European countries and that is logical. If the USA considers that the defense of Europe is no longer profitable given the risks and the economic, technological and geopolitical competition which delivers it to the Europeans, the historic feelings of friendship will not be enough. The USA have never hesitated to put their national interest ahead of the interest of their British allies in Suez in 1956, French in 1963 during the Elysee Treaty modified in an Atlanticist sense, Germans in 2021 as part of its sanctions policy against companies working with Iran. This is what allows them to conduct a policy of power which is essential to be credible and ensure stability in many regions of the world.

It is therefore the duty of Europeans to take responsibility for the defense of their territory and their interests. Some believe that in order to achieve this, Europeans must become autonomous in terms of military capabilities thanks to the pooling of their means and sovereign in decisions thanks to an identification of their common interests.

But the common capacities of observation, communication, transport, training and logistics cannot exceed a few thousand men because it is necessary to pool the means and integrate the forces to constitute an operational European force, taking into account the absence of an overpowered partner like the USA. This pooling makes them unavailable for use within a strictly national framework.

As each sovereign European state necessarily wants to retain most of its military resources, European forces cannot be sufficient. The Franco-German brigade, for example, is efficient but it cannot be split up so that its components are made available to France and Germany.
The Franco-German brigade, for example, is efficient but it cannot be split up so that its components are made available only to France and Germany.

And identify the common interests for which Europeans must act together and foresee the probable scenarios in which their Europeans will use their forces.
does not allow to face real crises, which are always different from those foreseen.

Dealing with real crises requires a strong political will capable of overcoming diplomatic pressures and domestic difficulties, which cannot be achieved with multiple states, except in cases of flagrant and significant aggression which remain rare. Despite all the strategic compasses and conflict scenarios, crises always occur through exceptional circumstances and in unprecedented contexts that cannot be accurately assessed. If the Europeans are faced with a Russian invasion of Ukraine or a hostile regime in Arabia they will not be able to agree in the time necessary, even if they agreed on paper to intervene or not. .

In addition, there will always be scenarios on which European states cannot agree on paper. Will Germany ever agree to intervene in Libya to overthrow the regime in place? Could France agree to intervene to defend Azerbaijan in the event of an Armenian attack?

Without the US federal government, what situation would the Americans have been in in 1991 when Iraq invaded Kuwait? California would probably have refused an intervention when we know that Joe Biden and John Kerry voted against this war while Texas would have supported the operation.

The cancellation of the sales contract for French submarines in Australia should make it clear that the European or French technological advance does not make it possible to compensate for the diplomatic and geopolitical weakness of Europeans in a world where each country is primarily looking for powerful partners and capable of influencing the relationships of geopolitical forces.

A solid defense of Europe, of its territory and of its interests therefore necessarily requires the creation of a European Federal Republic, which alone can have the will and the means necessary for this.​

Week 38, Year 2021
​

In her State of the Union speech on September 15, 2021, the President of the European Commission announced certain measures without noting the insufficient effectiveness of the European Union, which manifested itself indisputably in 2020-2021 at the diplomatic, industrial, economic and health plan in particular.

The European Union therefore still lives in denial and remains largely cut off from realities, except in certain technical or monetary fields.

Some of the measures announced by the chairperson of the committee are nevertheless useful, such as:

The preference given to European armaments for orders placed by European states, through the reduction of VAT. This measure is unfortunately unlikely to see the light of day given the dependence of the majority of European countries on the United States for their security.
Support for long-term European professional stay for young people is necessary to broaden the mental hirozon of young people who often vote for nationalist parties.
The boycott of products from forced labor will put pressure on governments that do not respect basic human rights principles.

Other measures will be ineffective, or will only increase efficiency in Europe by dispersing resources and responsibilities.

The HERA health alert agency and the 50 billion euros in funding will not bring any significant improvement compared to the WHO and national agencies and national health resources and may even disperse resources and skills. It would be necessary to ensure that EMA (European Medicines Agency) replaces the national medicine centers in order to have a coherent and effective vaccine and medicine policy. The European CDC should also replace local national CDCs in order to have a coherent and effective public health policy. But of course all this requires political responsibility and therefore a federal European government.

Support from the chip industry thanks to a law to reverse the trend of IT deindustrialisation of recent years. A law does not allow for an industrial policy. We also need coherent funding and sustainable political will. This is extremely difficult to achieve with 27 sovereign states.
A Global Gateway investment in quality infrastructure to connect people, goods and services. The funding available and the diplomatic weight of Europeans will probably be neither sufficient nor coherent to be able to compete effectively with the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative.

In summary, the measures unveiled by the President of the European Commission will in no way make it possible to redress the state of the European Union and the state of European countries, whose economic, demographic, diplomatic, military and technological decline is occurring. accentuates due in particular to their political divisions.

The time has come to create a European Federal Republic, starting with a Franco-German Federal Republic, member of the EU and responsible for defense, diplomacy, industry, research and the environment.
.
While 30% of French and Germans are in favor of the establishment of a European federal government, and 30% are against, leaders in France and Germany still refuse this solution. This is due to their lack of vision, their lack of competence and their lack of political courage. This penalizes all European citizens and undermines their economic and security interests.

Without a European government accountable to the electorate, Europeans will be fully vassalized by the superpowers. They will gradually be economically marginalized and will once again be exposed to internal rifts, fueled by powers outside Europe.

FEDERAL EUROPE will hold an information and awareness meeting on Wednesday September 22, 2021 at 3 p.m. at the Maison Pradier café, 6 rue de Bourgogne, 75007 Paris. Current topics, the situation in France and Germany and the content of the book Towards the European Federal Republic will be discussed. Do not hesitate to go there.

This will make it possible to make known the point of view of FEDERAL EUROPE, which is a Euroconservative political party which defends the European identity. It is a right-wing culturalist and social party. Its aim is to bring together pro-European conservatives and liberals in France and Germany and to rally them to European federalism by proposing a strong Europe militarily, industrially, commercially, culturally and demographically.

This will be an opportunity, for members who have not yet done so, to choose a functional department among the following 5. communication fo

Week 37, Year 2021

Dear European citizen, dear member, dear sympathizer,

I hope you have a good holiday and I am happy to resume contact with you to continue on the path of improving the situation and political practice in Europe through the creation of the European Federal Republic.

I am therefore happy to inform you of the publication of my latest book entitled "Towards the European Federal Republic"

This book provides theoretical, historical, political and operational bases for European federalism.

If you wish to receive it by email in pdf format, please let me know. Its price is 20 euros that you can pay via my paypal account (dakhan75@hotmail.com) or during a FEDERAL EUROPE meeting.

If you tell me that you can't afford this sum, I will send you the book for free.

To give you an idea of ​​its content and content, here is its presentation and summary

"Europe is lagging behind the rest of the world in growth and innovation.

The EU has virtually no influence on the international scene and its capacity for trade negotiations is hampered by divisions between European countries.


Terrorism hits the European continent as it spares the USA, Rusia and China. Unable to effectively control its borders, Europe is also the site of the most important illegal immigration in the world.

And neither the EU nor the European countries are able to defend their eastern border or intervene in the Middle East without US help.

  

As if this were not enough, European states and the European Commission have been unable to effectively protect and vaccinate their populations quickly against the Coronavirus pandemic.


Faced with this very worrying situation, what should Europeans do? Restore the full sovereignty of each European state, which seems utopian given the lack of critical size and the interdependence of European countries? Maintain the current system of cooperation between European states organized by the European Union when this system does not give satisfactory economic and diplomatic results? Or to found with France and Germany a European Federal Republic similar to the United States of America and a member of the European Union in order to finally have the means to act on major issues?


It is the interest and the possibility of creating the European Federal Republic that the author examines in this book, in a realistic and impactful way. "



Summary ………………………………………………………………………………… ..2

Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………… .... 4


I The European Federal Republic: a necessity ………………………….… 5


A / Assessment of European construction ……………………………………………… ..... 5

Positive elements. ………………………………………………………………………… ... 6

Negative elements


B / Internal and external problems and their causes …………………… ............… ... 12

Prosperity …………………………………………………………………………… ..12

The budget and European, national and local competences ………… ....... 15

The technology ………………………………………………………………………… ... 16

The environment ……………………………………………………………………… .... 17

Space and cyber ………………………………………………………………………… .19

Health ………………………………………………………………………………… ... 20

immigration ………………………………………………………… .. ……………… ..... 21

The sustainability of the single market ……………………………………………………… ..22

Defense ……………………………………………………………………………… ..23

Peace and international threats ……………………………………………… ..25

International competition ……………………………………………………….… 31

The need for meaning ……………………………………………………………………… .31


C / Internal advantages with the European Federal Republic ……………. …… 32

Industry and prosperity …………………………………………………………………… 32

Trade ……………………………………………………………………………… ... 33

Budget and euro area …………………………………………………………………… ... 33

Demographics …………………………………………………………………………… ... 34

Research ……………………………………………………………………………… .... 35

Environment ……………………………………………………………………………… .35

Social protection ………………………………………………………………………… 36

Borders and migration …………………………………………………………………… 36

Crime ………………………………………………………………………………… .37

Health ……………………………………………………………………………………… .39

The rule of law …………………………………………………………………………… ... 40

The need for meaning ……………………………………………………………………… ... 42


D / External benefits with the European Federal Republic ………………… ..43

Terrorism ……………………………………………… ... …………………………… .... 43

Defense, Space and Cyber ​​……………………………………………………………… .45

Foreign policy ……………………………………………………………………… ..45



II The European Federal Republic: a real possibility ………………… ... 52


A / The identity of European civilization ……………………………………………… ..52


Culture. And values ​​…………………………………………………………………… 52

The European population and the notion of European people ………………………… ..56

The territory ……………………………………………………………………………. …… .59

European History before 1945 ………………………………………………….… ... 60


B / Political will ………………………………………………………………….… ..67

European history after 1945 …………………………………………………… ..… .67

A Hamiltonian moment? .............................................. .............................................. 71

Majority rule? ............................................ .................................................. 73

Should we create a sovereign European assembly? ......................................... ..... 74

With which countries to found the European Federal Republic? .......................................... 76

What political forces to create the European Federal Republic? ................ 80

RFE institutions ………………………………………………………………… ...… ..83

RFE resources …………………………………………………………………… ... 87



The time has come to create a European Federal Republic, starting with a Franco-German Federal Republic, responsible for defense, diplomacy, industry, research and the environment.
.
While 30% of French and Germans are in favor of the establishment of a European federal government, and 30% are against, leaders in France and Germany still refuse this solution. This is due to their lack of vision, their lack of competence and their lack of political courage. This penalizes all European citizens and undermines their economic and security interests.

Such a federal government will do better than the European Commission and better than the European Parliament.

Without a European government accountable to the electorate, Europeans will be fully vassalized by the superpowers. They will gradually be economically marginalized and will once again be exposed to internal rifts, fueled by powers outside Europe.

For the major subjects of public life (defense, industry, ecology, diplomacy, trade, research, demography, immigration, etc.), a federal European government responsible to the electorate is necessary to obtain results. It is the model of the Europatriots which will produce a strong and independent Europe.

The confederal or semi-federal model of Europeanists is insufficient and outdated.

A European government worthy of the name requires an administration and with military and budgetary means and therefore a State. This federal European state is based on the European super nation also called European civilization. What is a civilization if not a great nation grouping together its small nations? Some civilizations are already united or almost united (China, India, North America, Russian world), others are not yet (Europe, Arab world, black Africa, Central Asia, Latin America ...)

The creation of the European government begins with the establishment of a Franco-German federal government, competent for all that France and Germany can no longer do alone, and which will be a member of the European Union. This will create a federal dynamic in Europe and allow the gradual incorporation of all European countries. Each European nation will remain sovereign in all areas for which real sovereignty can be exercised without the European federal government (education, social, justice, police, tourism, local culture, etc.)

FEDERAL EUROPE will speak at the conference on September 16, 2021 at 7:30 p.m. which will be held at the Maison de Allemagne de la Cité Universitaire in Paris. (registration via https://www.maison-heinrich-heine.org)

This will make it possible to make known the point of view of FEDERAL EUROPE, which is a Euroconservative political party which defends the European identity. It is a right-wing culturalist and social party. Its aim is to bring together pro-European conservatives and liberals in France and Germany and to rally them to European federalism by proposing a strong Europe militarily, industrially, commercially, culturally and demographically.

This intervention will also help recruit supporters and members.

Following this intervention an FE meeting will be held in a café, open to members and supporters.

This will be an opportunity, for members who have not yet done so, to choose a functional department among the following 5. communication, training, administration / fundraising, human resources, security.

It is also possible to choose a political department among the following 7 for members who wish to contribute to the programmatic reflection: industry / energy, social / fiscal, growth / trade, foreign affairs / defense, ecology, specific program France, specific program Germany .

In addition, everyone can make FE known by contacting members of pro-European organizations (European Movement, Young Europeans, etc.) via social networks to inform them of our upcoming interventions and share our website www.federaleurope.info.

FE is in the process of building up its permanent teams  in France and Germany who will be selected from among the most motivated members.

See you soon to give birth to the federal Europe we need

Week 27, Year 2021

The creation of the European Federal Republic and the political positioning of Die Linke

The German political party Die Linke has presented its program for the parliamentary elections to be held in September 2021 in Germany, in which it has a chance to secure enough seats to block the formation of a coalition government or to participate to a coalition government.

This program complements the positions taken by Die Linke and the ideological orientations of Die Linke, which makes it possible to get an idea of ​​its political position. But is this positioning desirable and is this positioning achievable?

The essential points of Die Linke's positioning in domestic policy are as follows:

Minimum wage of 13 euros per hour, normal working time of 30 hours per week with a maximum of 40 hours, 36 days off.
Prohibition of temporary work and redundancies. Executive salary limited to 20 times the minimum wage A minimum wage of 13 euros per hour could not be supported by small and medium-sized enterprises. On the other hand, we can increase the minimum wage in Germany to 10 euros, so as to be at the same level as in France. A legal working time of 30 hours could not be supported by companies if the income of employees is to remain constant. 40 working hours maximum per week penalizes effort and initiative. Limiting executive salaries to 20 times the minimum wage penalizes risk-taking and effort.
Free public crèche service and 12-month parental salary. More staff in schools and nurseries.
These are good measures to boost the birth rate.
Digitization of schools.
Above all, it is necessary to teach pupils to stay focused rather than to manipulate screens with which they have become familiar for a long time outside of school. The digitization of schools must nevertheless be implemented in order to be able to teach at a distance if necessary.
Universal income of 1200 euros per month, increase in pensions by 50%, retirement age at 65. A universal income of 1200 euros per month would discourage work and effort. An increase in withdrawals of 50% is not bearable by the pension system given the aging of the population. The increase in the retirement age is necessary given the aging of the population and the low birth rate, but it is possible to keep the retirement age at 65 in Germany by using temporary and extraordinary financing if the birth rate increases sharply in the years to come.
End of the separation between private and public health insurance and creation of a single solidarity health insurance. 500 euros salary increase for health personnel Nationalization of clinics.
Private health insurance plays a useful role in controlling the costs of health insurance, but access to all care must be guaranteed for people with low or no income. Maintaining a diverse and partly liberal health care system is important for developing medical skills. A salary increase of 500 euros for health workers is a good idea.
Capping of rents and land prices. Ban on investment companies from buying real estate to prevent real estate speculation. Capping rents and land prices is useful for increasing purchasing power and living standards because the real estate market is not an elastic market. But investment companies must be able to acquire real estate to increase the elasticity of this market and to promote the construction of new homes that must be able to be resold.

Fund of 20 billion euros to achieve carbon neutrality in 2035 thanks to a green and digital industrial policy, reduction in the price of public transport and development of public transport A green and digital industrial policy can only be effectively conducted at the plan European, given the high interdependence of industrial sectors and the high complementarity of industrial skills in Europe. Reducing the price of public transport and expanding it is a good idea.
Progressive wealth tax, increase in inheritance tax, no income tax for less than 1200 euros per month. Special progressive contribution on wealth from 2% to 30% payable over 20 years to finance expenses related to the coronavirus crisis. The wealth tax cannot be implemented effectively at the German level. To begin to be effective, it must be implemented at European level and therefore by a European federal government. A moderate European wealth tax is possible, but a progressive wealth tax discouraged risk and good management.
Prohibition of speculation in food products. This is a good idea as food products should not be subject to excessive price variations given their importance to the daily life of the vast majority of the population.

The essential points of its positioning in foreign policy are as follows:

Germany's exit from NATO and establishment of a collective security system with the participation of Russia. End of all Bundeswehr missions abroad. Germany cannot leave NATO until there is a European Federal Republic because only a European Federal Republic can defend the territory and vital interests of Europeans without the help of the USA. It is not possible to create a long-term viable security system in Europe without a European Federal Republic capable of balancing Russian power. Putting an end to all the Bundeswehr's external missions would lead to a degradation of its experience and its combat capacity and would entail a loss of European influence.

The essential points of its positioning in European politics are as follows

Continue with the current confederal system which characterizes the European Union.
As already said, this is not viable because the tensions between creditor and debtor countries in Europe, the lack of critical size of European countries and the growing interdependence between European countries requires a federalization of Europe. Otherwise a rapid European decline is to be expected. Continuing on the current path can also lead to the European Union breaking up into competing blocs (South, North, East West) each supported by extra-European powers whose aim is to share Europe's technological and industrial resources. 

In reality, Die Linke does not seek to constitute a European public and military power capable of defending the interests of European citizens because its ideology is based on social demagoguery, claiming that all political problems are explained by social differences. In addition, Die Linke endangers the stability and security of the European continent by demanding an exit from NATO without constituting a federal European power capable of acting as a counterweight to Russia. She prefers, out of opportunism, to continue on the current path of confederal Europe even if this is detrimental for the future of Germans and Europeans.

In short, Die linke's political position will not provide effective solutions to improve the economic and security situation of European citizens, and it endangers the security and prosperity of Europeans.

However, a very small part of the leaders and activists of Die Linke could be favorable to the concept of independent European power. A part of the popular electorate of die Linke attached to the notion of patriotism could be in favor of the creation of a European Federal Republic if a federalist, conservative and social European political alternative is available.

Given the lack of a credible federalist European political offer, FEDERAL EUROPE does not call for voting for a particular party during the German legislative elections of 2021. But FEDERAL EUROPE calls for not voting for the AFD party because this party represents a danger for the construction of Europe and for the creation of the European Federal Republic.

As already indicated, a credible federalist European political alternative can be carried by the ideas of the euro-conservative party Federal Europe. Its role will be to show how the European Federal Republic can provide solutions in the 4 areas essential for the life of European citizens, namely:

1 / Economic, social and environmental progress
2 / Military and diplomatic power and prestige
3 / Institutional and political authority
4 / Civilizational and cultural identity

​The time has come to create a European Federal Republic, starting with a Franco-German Federal Republic, responsible for defense, diplomacy, industry, research and the environment.

While 30% of the French and Germans are in favor of the establishment of a European government, and 30% are against, the leaders in France and Germany still refuse this solution. This is due to their lack of vision, their lack of competence and their lack of political courage. This penalizes all European citizens and undermines their economic and security interests.​​​​

Week 26, Year 2021

The creation of the European Federal Republic and the political positioning of the CDU-CSU

The German CDU-CSU has presented its program for the parliamentary elections which will take place in September 2021, and in which it has a chance to obtain enough seats to have an absolute majority or to form a coalition government.

This program complements the positions taken by the CDU-CSU and its ideological orientations, which makes it possible to get an idea of ​​its political positioning. But is this positioning desirable and is this positioning achievable?

The essential points of the CDU-CSU's positioning in domestic policy are as follows:

Low cost credit for the purchase of housing and lower property tax. Abolition of the real estate sales tax for large families Lower taxes for large families.
These are pretty good measures because they will increase the number of homeowners in Germany and they will promote the birth rate.

No increase in taxes on high incomes, no wealth tax, limitation of corporate tax to 25%. Lower taxes for small and medium incomes. Return to budgetary balance and maintenance of the debt limitation mechanism.
These measures cannot be implemented at the same time. We cannot at the same time lower taxes on the middle classes and on companies, not increase taxes on high incomes and balance the budget.

Reduction of bureaucracy on businesses.
It is always useful, but we must also increase the means of combating tax and social fraud.

CO2 prices and private initiatives as central instruments of ecological innovation. Support for the photovoltaic industry, maintenance of all motorization systems, including internal combustion engines.
We must support not only the photovoltaic industry but also all strategic and innovative sectors, either directly or through trade policy and regulations. This requires an industrial policy which can only be conducted effectively at European level and by a European federal government, given the high interdependence of industrial sectors and technological skills in Europe. We must promote the switch to electric motor as quickly as possible through industrial policy to ensure the future of the European automotive industry.

No increase in the retirement age and generational pension of 100 euros per child. The CSU defends the idea of ​​a retirement for mothers.
Given the demographic situation and the increase in the length of life, it will be difficult not to increase the retirement age. A capital of 100 euros per child to ensure their retirement is useful to complete the pay-as-you-go pension system. The principle of a right to retirement for mothers of families is useful to promote the birth rate.

More police presence, surveillance cameras, bodycams, facial recognition and European data exchange to fight crime.
All these measures are useful in the fight against crime.
 
The essential points of its positioning in foreign policy are as follows:

Maintenance and strengthening of the transatlantic link. More importance given to the peaceful zone. Confrontation of Russia and China concerning their power politics and their internal politics.

As already said, It is necessary to remain in NATO as long as a European Federal Republic capable of defending itself has not been created. However, maintaining the transatlantic link at the current level does not favor the economic, industrial, commercial and financial interests of Europeans against the USA. This concerns in particular concerning investments in Iran, the European armaments industry, the taxation of large foreign technological groups (the 15% tax negotiated by the G7 is totally insufficient since the corporate tax rate in the world is on average 30%), European exports to the USA and to the world, access to American public markets and European influence in the Russian world, in the arable world, in Central Asia and in Africa. Maintaining the transatlantic link at the current level also risks dragging us into a trade or military war with China for the defense of American diplomatic and military interests in the Far East. The CDU-CSU wants to follow the Americans to give them satisfaction by increasing antagonism with China and Russia, which is harmful for independence and for the interests of Europeans.

The essential points of its positioning in European politics are as follows:

Continue with the current confederal system which characterizes the European Union.
As already said, this is not viable because the tensions between creditor and debtor countries in Europe, the lack of critical size of European countries and the growing interdependence between European countries requires a federalization of Europe. Otherwise a rapid European decline is to be expected. Continuing on the current path can also lead to the European Union breaking up into competing blocs (South, North, East West) each supported by extra-European powers whose aim is to share Europe's technological and industrial resources. ,

In reality, the CDU-CSU does not seek to constitute a European power because it is politically risky. She prefers, out of opportunism, to continue on the current path of Atlanticism and confederal Europe in order to remain in power, even if this is detrimental for the future of Germans and Europeans. The current comfortable short-term situation of Europe under American protection suits it more than the creation of a powerful and independent Europe capable of securing its future.

In short, the political position of the German CDU-CSU will not make it possible to provide effective solutions to improve the economic and security situation of European citizens, because of its opportunism and the mediocrity of its political positioning.
However, some of the CDU-CSU leaders and activists might be in favor of the notion of an independent European power, European patriotism and a strong European federal government. A large part of the electorate of the CDU-CSU could also be favorable to these 3 concepts and therefore to the creation of a European Federal Republic if a federalist and conservative European political alternative is available.

As already indicated, this credible political alternative can be supported by the ideas of the Euro-conservative Federal Europe party. Its role will be to show how the European Federal Republic can provide solutions in the 4 areas essential for the life of European citizens:

1 / Economic, social and environmental progress
2 / Military, diplomatic power and prestige
3 / Institutional and political authority
4 / Civilizational and cultural identity,

While 30% of the French and Germans are in favor of the establishment of a European government, and 30% are against, the leaders in France and Germany still refuse this solution. This is due to their lack of vision, their lack of competence and their lack of political courage. This penalizes all European citizens and undermines their economic and security interests.​​​​ 

Week 25, Year 2021,

The creation of the European Federal Republic and AFD's political positioning


The German AFD presented its program for the legislative elections which will take place in September 2021, and in which it has a chance to obtain enough seats to prevent the CDU-CSU from having an absolute majority or to block the formation of a CDU-FDP coalition government

This program complements AFD's positions and its ideological orientations, which gives an idea of ​​its political positioning. But is this positioning desirable and is this positioning achievable?

The essential points of AFD's positioning in domestic policy are as follows:

Restoration of German borders with systematic physical checks to fight against the entry of refugees. No family reunification allowed for refugees. No asylum request possible without identity documents making an expulsion possible. Some of these measures are undesirable, others are. The reestablishment of physical borders between European countries would greatly complicate the movement of goods and people in Europe and is therefore not justified, except in the event of an exceptionally serious situation. Family reunification for refugees who have been granted asylum must be maintained for human reasons and because this only slightly increases the number of refugees. The inability of undocumented migrants to apply for asylum is a good idea, unless the authorities in the country of origin confiscate identity documents.
No containment measures against the Coronavirus but call for individual responsibility. No incentive for vaccination. This would cause an explosion in the number of COVID 19 cases and slow the pace of vaccinations, thereby extending the time needed to achieve herd immunity.
Liberalization of gun ownership regulations This is desirable because the link between the possession of legal firearms and increased crime does not exist. The dissemination of legal firearms allows citizens to practice demanding sport and develop a form of culture.
Support for the birth rate through a birth credit intended for young couples, through a retirement subsidy based on the number of children and through assistance for all goods and services related to the education of children, including including help for grandparents.
These are good ideas which are useful in boosting the birth rate in Europe, which is far too low.
More autonomy for the recruitment of teachers by high schools and no courses on Islam or gender ideology, which makes any difference between men and women. Increased importance for German history lessons, for German traditions and for German culture. Some of these measures are undesirable, others are. Part of the recruitment of secondary school teachers could indeed be made more flexible. It is not justified to give courses on gender ideology, which is a questionable ideology. The courses on Islam on the other hand are obviously useful as the courses intended to make known the other religions. German history and culture courses must be accompanied by courses on the history of European unification from ancient Rome and by courses on European cultural heritage.
No foreign funding for Muslim associations and places of worship. This is discriminatory and unconstitutional.

Refusal of the objective of carbon neutrality for 2050. Privileged private car but protection of natural spaces and development of public transport. This type of environmental policy is insufficient to allow real progress in this area.
Lower taxes and compulsory levies but digital tax. This fiscal policy is unable to generate the income necessary to increase family spending, improve infrastructure and invest in strategic sectors in a country like Germany where a significant portion of income comes from exports.
No rent limitation or construction of social housing but financial support for tenants.
This housing policy will not be able to curb the excessive rise in rents and will increase spending too sharply. The construction of social housing remains essential but its quality and location must be improved to fight against ghettoization.

Creation of a compulsory national service, to be carried out in the fields of health, firefighting or in technical fields.It is useful in order to broaden the horizon and diversify the values ​​of young people, by facilitating social mixing and ethnic. To this should be added the possibility of performing this compulsory national service in the defense of the territory, in order to give young people who so wish the bases of martial and military culture.

The essential points of its positioning in foreign policy are as follows:

Maintaining the transatlantic link and developing relations with Russia, in particular by putting an end to the sanctions owed to Ukraine As already said, it is necessary to remain in NATO as long as a European Federal Republic capable of defending itself has not not been created. However, maintaining the transatlantic link at the current level does not favor the economic, industrial, commercial and financial interests of Europeans vis-à-vis the USA. This concerns in particular concerning investments in Iran, the European armaments industry, the taxation of large foreign technological groups (the 15% tax negotiated by the G7 is totally insufficient since the corporate tax rate in the world is on average 30%), European exports to the United States and to the world, access to American public markets and European influence in the Russian world, in the arable world, in Central Asia and in Africa. Maintaining the transatlantic link at the current level also risks dragging us into a trade or military war with China for the defense of American diplomatic and military interests in the Far East. The development of ties with Russia is useful to avoid an ideological and strategic confrontation with the Sino-Russian bloc wanted by the USA and to reduce dependence on the USA. On the other hand, the sanctions concerning Russian policy in Ukraine must be maintained because Europe cannot allow a country with which it has economic interests and important cultural ties to be dismembered or occupied.

The essential points of its positioning in European politics are as follows

Get Germany out of the euro and out of the European Union. Creation of an alliance of sovereign European nations This European policy would lead to the contraction of trade in Europe, to a prolonged economic recession in Europe, to an acceleration of European decline relative to other powers and to the resurgence of the risk of war between European nations, each supported by extra-European powers defending their allies in Europe. We would therefore witness a return of European history from 1648 to 1945 which was a complete failure and which ended with the domination of the Americans and the Soviets over Europe.

In reality, AFD is opposed to the creation of a powerful Europe. because of its largely reactionary ideology. The current situation of Europe under American protection suits him more than the creation of a powerful independent Europe because an independent Europe must be united and a united Europe requires a European federal government.

In summary, the political position of the German AFD will not make it possible to provide effective solutions to improve the economic and security situation of European citizens even if this party has certain good ideas concerning the birth rate in particular. In addition, his refusal to build a confederal Europe embodied by the EU and his detestation of a federal Europe, makes him incapable and incompetent.

However, a small part of AFD leaders and activists could be in favor of the notion of European patriotism and a strong European federal government. Part of the AFD electorate could also be in favor of European patriotism and therefore the creation of a European Federal Republic if a federalist and conservative European political alternative is available.

As already indicated, this credible political alternative can be supported by the ideas of the Euro-conservative Federal Europe party. Its role will be to show how the European Federal Republic can provide solutions in the 4 areas essential for the life of European citizens:

1 / Economic, social and environmental progress
2 / Military, diplomatic power and prestige
3 / Institutional and political authority
​4 / Civilizational and cultural identity,

While 30% of the French and Germans are in favor of the establishment of a European government, and 30% are against, the leaders in France and Germany still refuse this solution. This is due to their lack of vision, their lack of competence and their lack of political courage. This penalizes all European citizens and undermines their economic and security interests.​​​


Week 24, Year 2021

The creation of the European Federal Republic and the political positioning of the FDP

Knowing the positions of the main political forces in France and Germany is necessary to show their inadequacies and to attract some of their members to the FEDERAL EUROPE party. This is also useful to know if some of their ideas can facilitate the creation of the European Federal Republic.

The German FDP has presented its program for the parliamentary elections which will take place in September 2021, and in which it has a chance to secure enough seats to participate in a coalition government.

This program complements its positions and its ideological orientations, which makes it possible to get an idea of ​​its political positioning. But is this positioning desirable and is this positioning achievable?

The essential points of the FDP's positioning in domestic policy are as follows:

Corporate tax rate lowered to 25% (instead of 30% currently). Lower income tax for middle class households and upper-middle class households. Reduction of public debt below 60% of GDP. This will be almost impossible to achieve because the tax cuts will not produce additional growth in a country like Germany whose production is mainly directed towards exports and whose investment needs in school infrastructure, transport and digital infrastructure are important.
Using emission certificate trading to regulate CO2 emissions, setting the maximum amount of CO2 that can be produced each year instead of setting the price of emission certificates. This is desirable, but it will be very difficult to achieve without a European federal government responsible for the environment and therefore capable of enforcing environmental rules at European level to avoid distortions of competition. These distortions of competition lead to the abandonment of these rules.
Social spending limited to 50% of German GDP. Education budget increased by 1% of GDP and more German federal competences for education in order to improve equal opportunities throughout Germany. This is desirable, but these spending increases are not achievable given the absence of additional taxes on top incomes and large businesses.
Construction of a network of charging stations for electric cars, privatization of train companies, but no privatization of railway infrastructure. This is not desirable. Building electric charging stations without supporting electric car production is inconsistent and effectively supporting electric vehicle production requires a European federal government responsible for industrial policy. The privatization of train companies is unnecessary because the market is already open to competition and it is necessary to be able to use public actors in the field of transport by train in order to grow traffic quickly and in order to serve the entire European territory.
Funded retirement for part of pensions and retirement age made more flexible. This is desirable if funded retirement is an option and the retirements do not exceed a maximum age.
Privatization of Deutsche Post and Deutsche Telekom and investment of the proceeds from these sales in digital infrastructures. The privatization of Deutsche Post is not desirable because Deutsche Post is useful for improving German spatial planning and reducing inequalities.
Legalization of cannabis. This is not desirable. It is the medicalization of cannabis and drugs in general that is desirable.
Extension of the term of the Bundestag legislature to 5 years (currently 4 years). This is a good idea; as it would strengthen stability and political continuity in Germany

The essential points of its positioning in foreign policy are as follows:

Maintenance of the transatlantic link in all areas. As already indicated, it is feasible but it does not favor the economic, industrial, commercial and financial interests of Europeans against the US. particularly concerning investments in Iran, the European armaments industry, the taxation of large foreign technological groups since the 15% tax negotiated by the G7 is totally insufficient since the corporate tax rate in the world is in average of 30%, European exports to the USA and to the world, access to American public markets and European influence in the Russian world, in the arable world, in Central Asia and in Africa. It also risks dragging us into a trade or military war with China for the defense of American diplomatic and military interests in the Far East.

The essential points of its positioning in European politics are as follows

Continue with the current European confederal system. This is not viable because the tensions between creditor and debtor countries, the lack of critical size, the growing interdependence between European countries requires a federalization of Europe, otherwise a rapid European decline is to be expected. Continuing on the current path can also lead to the European Union breaking up into competing blocs (South, North, East West) each supported by extra-European powers whose aim is to share Europe's technological and industrial resources. 

In reality, if the FDP is not opposed to the constitution of a powerful Europe, the FDP is not very favorable to this notion. because of its free trade globalist ideology which tends to deny power rivalries. The current situation in Europe placed under American protection suits him, while this is detrimental not only for Europeans but also for the global geostrategic and geoeconomic balance. Indeed the USA can no longer be the policeman of the world and that Europe has a geopolitical role played to ensure the great balances.

In short, the political position of the German FDP will not make it possible to provide effective solutions to improve the economic and security situation of European citizens. The FDP does not want to create a sovereign Europe capable of deciding alone to act effectively thanks to a central and federal government. In addition, confederal-type European integration will not be strengthened by the FDP, which insists on the need to increase the competitiveness of debtor countries without understanding that creditor countries must also improve their competitiveness given the extra international competition. European. The European conception of the FDP is therefore not viable in the medium term, given the financial imbalances between European countries and the inevitable divergences of electoral and financial interests between European governments.

However, some of the leaders and activists and voters of the FDP really want to constitute a European power in partnership with the conservatives and can therefore promote the emergence of a European Federal Republic. Likewise, part of the FDP electorate could also be in favor of the creation of a European Federal Republic if a credible conservative federalist political alternative is available.

As already indicated, this credible political alternative can be supported by the ideas of the Euro-conservative Federal Europe party. It will have to show why a European Federal Republic can provide solutions in the 4 areas essential for the life of European citizens:

1 / Economic, social and environmental progress
2 / Military, diplomatic power and prestige
3 / Institutional and political authority
​4 / Civilizational and cultural identity, 

While 30% of the French and Germans are in favor of the establishment of a European government, and 30% are against, the leaders in France and Germany still refuse this solution. This is due to their lack of vision, their lack of competence and their lack of political courage. This penalizes all European citizens and undermines their economic and security interests.​​

Week 23, Year 2021

The creation of the European Federal Republic and the political positioning of the SPD

Knowing the positions of the main political forces in France and Germany is necessary to show their shortcomings and to attract some of their members to the FEDERAL EUROPE party. This is also useful to know if some of their ideas can facilitate the creation of the European Federal Republic.

The German SPD has presented its program for the parliamentary elections which will take place in September 2021, and in which it has a chance to secure enough seats to participate in a coalition government.
This program complements its positions and its ideological orientations, which makes it possible to get an idea of ​​its political positioning. But is this positioning desirable and is this positioning achievable?

The essential points of the SPD's positioning in domestic politics are as follows:

Support for the green and digital economy, lower energy costs by reforming its financing, no taxation of heating systems producing CO2, increased public investments in green and social businesses. Most of these measures cannot be implemented effectively without a European industrial and energy policy, and therefore without a European federal government.
Increase in the minimum wage to 12 euros, normal working conditions for mini jobs, increase in nursery and daycare places. This is desirable and feasible under current European and German institutional conditions.
Hartz IV without job search conditions, extension of the unemployment benefit period, freeze on rent increases, facilitation of home ownership. These social measures may face social dumping from other European countries without a European federal government powerful enough to coordinate and guide social policy in Europe.
Development of clean public transport, development of the railway, subsidy of the price of train tickets, speed limit of 130km / h on the motorway, This is also achievable but the development of railways will have to be carried out at European level in order to be able to compete with the air transport and what requires a European transport policy, and therefore a European federal government sufficiently powerful to coordinate and guide transport policy in Europe.

Increase in taxes on high incomes, wealth tax. These tax measures will be very difficult to implement without a European tax policy, which requires a European federal government
Facilitation of access to hospital care. This is desirable and achievable under current conditions.

The essential points of its positioning in foreign policy are as follows:

Maintenance of the transatlantic link in all areas. It is doable but it does not favor the economic, industrial, commercial and financial interests of Europeans against the US. in particular concerning investments in Iran, the European armaments industry, the taxation of large foreign technological groups since the 15% tax negotiated by the G7 is clearly insufficient, European exports to the USA and to the world, the access to American public markets and the influence of Europeans in the Russian world, the arable world, Central Asia and Africa. It also risks dragging us into a trade or military war with China for the defense of American diplomatic and military interests in the Far East.

The essential points of its positioning in European politics are as follows

Increase in the EU's own resources through the tax on technology companies and the carbon tax. This is insufficient because it will not make it possible to constitute a European budget exceeding 2% of European GDP, and it cannot therefore allow the creation of the European Federal Republic.

In reality, if the SPD is not opposed to the constitution of a powerful Europe, the SPD is not very favorable to this notion. because of its internationalist ideology which tends to deny power rivalries. In addition, the SPD has a problem with European cultural identity (Romanity, Germanity, Christianity, rationality) and with political authority by refusing a form of political power of the presidential type. He therefore rather defends a weak Europe and therefore does not really want to create a European Federal Republic. The current situation in Europe placed under American protection suits him, while this is detrimental to the geostrategic and geoeconomic balance of the world. Indeed the USA can no longer be the policeman of the world and that Europe has a geopolitical role played to ensure the great balances.

In short, the political position of the German SPD will not make it possible to provide effective solutions to improve the economic and security situation of European citizens. The SPD will not be able to create a sovereign Europe because sovereignty requires the ability to decide and therefore requires centralized European political power. Nor will it be able to create a powerful Europe because power requires the ability to decide and also the ability to act continuously and coherently in important areas (economic, cultural, diplomatic and military.). A Europe deprived of sovereignty and deprived of power cannot be independent. And it can hardly be autonomous, except perhaps in economic matters. However, European integration of the confederal type will be strengthened, particularly at the financial level, which is better than nothing but which is not viable in the medium term given the financial imbalances between European countries.

A small part of the leaders and activists of the SPD really wants to constitute a European power and promote the emergence of a European Federal Republic. On the other hand, a significant part of the SPD electorate could be in favor of the creation of a European Federal Republic if a credible federalist political alternative is available.
This credible political alternative can be supported by the ideas of the Euro-conservative Federal Europe party. It will have to show why a European Federal Republic can provide solutions in the 4 areas essential for the life of European citizens:

1 / Economic, social and environmental progress 2 / Military, diplomatic power and prestige 3 / Institutional and political authority 4 / Civilizational and cultural identity

While 30% of the French and Germans are in favor of the establishment of a European government, and 30% are against, the leaders in France and Germany still refuse this solution. This is due to their lack of vision, their lack of competence and their lack of political courage. This penalizes all European citizens and undermines their economic and security interests.​​

Week 22, Year 2021

The creation of the European Federal Republic and the political positioning of the German Greens

Knowing the positions of the main political forces in France and Germany is necessary to show their shortcomings and to attract them, or to attract some of their members, to the FEDERAL EUROPE party. This knowledge is also useful to know if some of their ideas can facilitate the creation of the European Federal Republic.

The German Greens have presented their program for the parliamentary elections which will take place in September 2021, and in which they have a chance to obtain a relative majority in the Bundestag and therefore to form a coalition government, either with the CDU or with the SPD.

This program completes their positions and their ideological orientations and this set makes it possible to get an idea of ​​their political positioning. But is this positioning desirable and is this positioning achievable?

The essential points of the positioning of the German Greens in domestic politics are as follows:

Raising the objectives of reducing CO2 emissions and pollution, clean car in 2030, significant support for digitization, the green economy and clean public transport, Without an effective and European industrial policy led by a European federal government, and without an energy policy that relies in part on nuclear power, these goals will be difficult to achieve.

research budget increased to 3.5% of GDP. Given the dispersion of research budgets in Europe, this point would not be effective without a single European research policy, which presupposes a European federal government.

Significant increase in the minimum wage, public aid to companies which practice high wages, flexible working time between 30 and 40 hours, minimum old age, wealth tax, increase in the tax on high incomes. These social and fiscal measures will be difficult to implement without a European fiscal policy, which requires a European federal government

Reinforcement of the financing of public hospitals and of the public service mission of clinics, controlled legalization of cannabis, Legalization of cannabis is not desirable. It is its medical access that must be put in place and not its legalization. These measures can be carried out under current European institutional conditions.

Significant improvement in access to housing for the disadvantaged classes, protection of tenants by limiting rents. This is a step in the right direction and can be achieved under current European institutional conditions.

Facilitation of the Integration of legal immigrants via a right of residence after 5 years. This can be achieved under current European institutional conditions, but it poses a problem of coordination with the migration and family policy of other European countries.

The essential points of their positioning in foreign policy are as follows:

Strengthening of the transatlantic partnership with Russia and China. It is feasible but it will harm the economic, industrial, commercial and financial interests of Europeans vis-à-vis the US. in particular concerning investments in Iran, the European armaments industry, the taxation of large foreign technological groups, European exports to the United States, access to American public markets. It also risks dragging us into a trade or military war with China for the defense of American diplomatic and military interests in the Far East.

Refusal of European or German combat drones, and refusal of an increase in national and European military spending, severe restriction of arms exports. This is achievable but it will seriously damage the European military potential.

Strengthening multilateralism (WTO, UN ...). This will not be enough to defend the standard of living, the quality of life and the security of European citizens, because only a European power and therefore a European Federal Republic can do it.

Green and social European trade policy. This is very difficult to achieve without a European power having the diplomatic and military tools to negotiate on an equal footing with the great powers.

The essential points of their positioning in European politics are as follows:

Implementation of the majority decision in the European Council to put an end to the paralysis which characterizes the fiscal, industrial, commercial and international action of the EU. due to the rule of unanimous voting in the Council of Heads of Government. The aim of this is to gradually create a European Federal Republic with a parliamentary system, thanks to the gradual increase in the powers and financial resources of the European Parliament and the European Commission. This is impractical because the joint decision will not be accepted by all European governments and therefore cannot be implemented. It will be called into question by the populations who will refuse to submit to a European authority whose legitimacy will be indirect and therefore insufficient in relation to national legitimacy. Finally, a parliamentary system does not make it possible to give the European Federal Republic sufficient efficiency and stability given the size and diversity of Europe.

In fact, for a good part of the leaders and activists of the German Greens, Europe must in fact remain confederal but with a strong financial integration. They are not in favor of realism in foreign policy and power politics and therefore do not wish to give themselves the means to really create a European Federal Republic. They are attractive from an electoral point of view above all because of the American protection which is responsible for power politics and which leaves it to Europeans to develop a policy that is above all humanitarian, moral and ecological. But this compromises the future of Europeans and their integration into a European republic capable of correctly defending their interests.

However, part of the leaders and activists really want a European federal republic and they could therefore support the Federal Europe project, which contains enough ecological and social elements to attract part of the green voters.

In short, the political position of the German Greens will not make it possible to provide solutions to really improve the economic and security situation of European citizens. However, European integration of the confederal type will be strengthened, particularly in financial and environmental terms, which is better than nothing. Their will in principle to create a European Federal Republic may tip some of them towards the ideas of the FE party.​

Week 21, year 2021

An Hamiltonian Moment ?

Some believe that the European debt linked to the health and economic consequences of the Coronavirus pandemic constitutes an event comparable to the Hamiltonian moment. The Hamiltonian moment alludes to what happened in 1790 in the USA by allowing the federal government to have significant own resources and to pool the debts of the American states.


According to them, the Covid debt can be perpetuated and repaid thanks to the creation of significant European own resources, this then causing the creation of a federal government following the method used in the United States. This method consists in proposing a European federal constitution to all European states at the same time.


This is unwarranted. The American and European situations are fundamentally different. In the USA, it was the existence of the American Federal Republic, created in 1788 thanks to the political victory of the federalists over the American confederates, which enabled Hamilton in 1790 to set up significant federal budgetary resources and to pool state debts by perpetuating the federal debt.


In the confederal system of the American Congress, the purpose of which was only to encourage American states to cooperate with each other without having political sovereignty or the power to levy taxes or incur debt, as is the case today in Europe, Alexander Hamilton would never have been able to create own resources worthy of the name and to mutualize the debts of the American States.


Indeed, the American constitution of 1788 establishing the American Federal Republic provided for a central federal government endowed with powerful legislative and executive means. It is these federal institutional political means that enabled Alexander Hamilton to create a lasting federal debt and significantly increase the US government's own resources.


The error concerning the comparison between American debt and European debt therefore stems from the fact that Europeans are politically much more divided than Americans. Due to their more varied history, languages ​​and local mentalities, they have not yet succeeded in creating a federal and central European government. This is what prevents them from creating a lasting European debt and a substantial European budget supplied by significant own resources.


And it is European heterogeneity that makes necessary a specific form of European political unification, different from that produced in the USA between 1781 and 1788.


In the USA the confederal constitution of 1781, which is comparable to the current European treaties organizing the functioning of the European Union, could be replaced by a federal constitution in 1788 and with the simultaneous agreement of all the member states of the American confederation. It was able to come into being so quickly and for all the American states simultaneously because of the power of the federalist party in most of the American states and because of the youth and the homogeneity of the country. This American constitution of 1788 gave the President and Congress the skills and financial means necessary to ensure defense, to conduct diplomacy, to support research and to manage trade relations.

In Europe, the weakness of federalism, cultural diversity and political dependence on the USA make a federalism of small steps essential. It will be necessary to be satisfied with the 2 countries necessary and sufficient to create a European Federal Republic, namely France and Germany, in order not to make the task impossible and to create a major political fact in Europe, capable of bringing about the rest. of European countries in this Republic.


The example to follow in this regard is therefore not the USA. The example would rather be that of German unity, which occurred gradually from 1815 to 1871. Let us recall that the German national movement failed in 1848 because it was not powerful enough to achieve German political unity with one. suddenly, taking into account the dynastic particularities, in particular that of Prussia and that of Bavaria and taking into account the linguistic, cultural and political heterogeneity of Germany. In addition, some regions were favorable to France, others favorable to Austria and still others favorable to Prussia.


As a result German unity was achieved gradually from Prussia, opposing Austria and then France. This is what will create a European budget and debt worthy of the name.


The Europeans should therefore abandon the idea of ​​an American federalist political method, and adopt a geographical federalist political method by proceeding step by step, starting with France and with Germany.

While 30% of the French and Germans are in favor of the establishment of a European government, and 30% are against, the leaders in France and Germany still refuse this solution. This is due to their lack of vision, their lack of competence and their lack of political courage. This penalizes all European citizens and undermines their economic and security interests.​



Week 20, year 2021

Which rule of law  for the Europeans? 

The notion of the rule of law corresponds to respect for constitutional and legal rules of law.
This makes it possible in particular to distinguish the regimes based on democratic and liberal constitutional rules and the regimes subjected to insufficient rules or subjected to the arbitrariness of the governors.
But liberal and democratic constitutional rules are the subject of increasingly strong challenges in certain European countries and from certain European political forces.

While the democratic nature of regimes in Europe is not the subject of discussion, it is their liberal nature that seems to pose problems for these political forces. According to these political forces, political liberalism, by instituting complete independence of justice and total freedom of the media through law, would prevent authority from governing and contribute to political disorder and moral decline.

These political forces therefore want to put in place new rules of law in order to institute a more authoritarian and more efficient form of illiberal democracy. In an illiberal democracy, the media are totally or partially controlled by the authorities and the judges of the bench are placed under the influence of the political authorities. This model exists in Russia and in much more limited proportions in Poland, Hungary and India for example.
Political illiberalism is actually explained by the idea that the national will embodied by an elected and therefore legitimate political power must dominate the judiciary and media power.

This is a mistake because it opens the way for judicial arbitrariness, abuse of power and possibly the violation of constitutional rules. Indeed, these rules are also legal norms and if the judges are not independent, the protection of constitutional rules is no longer guaranteed, which undermines the rule of law. The legitimacy of power is also compromised since the elections are not considered fully due to pressure from the media and opposition parties or figures.

Iliberal-type democracy is therefore not a desirable regime.
A less arbitrary variant of illiberal democracy exists. It is about democracy with a dominant party. In this model, notably represented by Singapore, the ruling party prevents opposition parties from winning elections by using a legal arsenal to threaten, charge or imprison political activities that are too critical of it. In this model, the media are often subject to direct or indirect control by political power. On the other hand, the independence of the judges of the bench is not called into question. This makes it possible to guarantee a favorable climate for foreign investment and economic development since the rules of rights, including political ones, are always respected.

Dominant party democracy presents a serious problem of legitimacy since the barriers it provides against opposition parties are not legitimate. This can lead to chronic political instability if economic or social conditions deteriorate.
But one cannot deny the lack of professionalism, efficiency and long-term vision of liberal democracies, since political power is dependent on the changing, emotional and superficial opinion broadcast in most of the media.

​Rational and informed debate actually does not really exist in liberal representative democracies since the purpose of the media is to gain audiences and the purpose of the opposition is to beat the government to lose the election.
To make liberal democracy more efficient and professional, one could consider the establishment of a vertical representative democracy. In this model, political power makes decisions more efficiently and with less demagoguery thanks to the support of government media. These would be responsible for publicizing and explaining government policy through their editorial line. Relying on private media politically favorable to the government is not satisfactory because these media sometimes are not powerful enough or do not want to systematically publicize and explain the policies carried out by the government because that would not be profitable enough. It should be added that under the current system, the pro-government private media often use their influence over public opinion to advance their particular interests with the government.

In a vertical representative democracy, the media landscape will remain pluralist and free, but the government will have the means to make known, and to make understood its policy, contrary to what is happening for the moment, which harms the general interest and in the interest of every citizen. The media which follow an editorial line favorable to the opposition, to large companies or to the journalistic corporation will remain powerful enough to ensure pluralism, given the means available to these media organizations via their investors and their patrons.


It is also necessary in a vertical democracy and in a rule of law and in a vertical democracy, to be able to conduct a penal policy through instructions given to the prosecution by the Minister of Justice. But it is also necessary to guarantee the absolute independence of the judges of the bench, otherwise the very principle of justice is called into question, with serious consequences for the protection of constitutional rules.


Finally, in a vertical democracy, the reinforced presidential regime, with the concomitance of presidential and legislative elections is preferable since it allows to give political power legitimacy, stability, efficiency and continuity generally greater than that of parliamentary regimes which are based on compromises and coalitions between political parties.



The time has come to create a European federal government, starting with a Franco-German government, responsible for defense, diplomacy, industry, research and the environment.

.
While 30% of the French and Germans are in favor of the establishment of a European government, and 30% are against, the leaders in France and Germany still refuse this solution. This is due to their lack of vision, their lack of competence and their lack of political courage. This penalizes all European citizens and undermines their economic and security interests.

Week 19, year 2021

Was Napoleon I pro European? 

On the occasion of the bicentenary of the Emperor's death, reactionary circles but also extreme left circles try to make people believe that Napoleon I was a patriot only concerned about the fate of France and of an anti-European temperament.

They evoke his incessant wars and the exploitation of the countries placed under his domination to give credence to this thesis.

This biased and emotional presentation does not stand up to examination of the facts.

First of all, let us recall that the wars of the 1st Empire followed the incessant wars of the Ancien Régime and the Revolution, in particular the war of Spanish succession, the war of Austrian succession, the 7-year war, the Franco-English war of 1778 and the war declared in 1792 by France. The Napoleonic wars can therefore be explained by the permanent geopolitical struggle between the great European powers since their emergence after the Renaissance. What explains the unprecedented territorial expansion of France under Napoleon is on the one hand the economic and military power of France resulting from the social, economic, administrative and military reforms of the Revolution. It is on the other hand the administrative talent and the military genius of Napoleon Bonaparte who won 67 of the 75 battles he fought, even if he lost the war by precipitation. He started the Russian campaign when the war in Spain was not over and with the aim of taking Moscow which was not a defensible city.

The incessant wars and the French expansion under the 1st Empire cannot therefore be explained by an alleged exacerbated and anti-European patriotism on the part of Napoleon.

Napoleon I also extended to almost all of Europe the civil code which constituted a considerable social progress, thus unifying the largely European continent at the legal level.

It has strengthened economic exchanges between European states through the continental blockade and it has pacified Europe with its European political system made up of its vassal states, even if it has not created an internal European market.

He created a France of 130 departments comprising as many rooted French as new French who did not speak French.
He created a European political feeling because the populations of the conquered countries were in their majority favorable to his person, like Goethe. This was the result of the pacification, progress and prosperity produced by its political system in Europe.

He married an Austrian princess to definitively pacify Europe through an alliance with Austria, the continent's second power at the time.

In 1811 he created a large European army under his command to invade Russia. This army included as many European soldiers who were not French as French soldiers.

He conceived the Russian campaign as a further means of uniting the peoples of Europe among themselves and as an opportunity to put Russia out of Europe, according to the Memoirs he dictated.

Finally, in another book, namely in the Memorial of Saint Helena, it is said that he was in favor of the idea of ​​a European political federation on the model of the United States of America.

Given the facts recalled above, given his open-mindedness and given his interest in the fate of the European continent led by his him and his family, it is obvious that Napoleon I was a European pro and even a European at heart.
​
By contributing to the legal and economic integration of Europe and by showing that the populations of Europe could be in their great majority favorable to his Empire, Napoleon I also facilitated the emergence of the European dream.
Today it is finally possible to realize the Napoleonic dream of the United States of Europe to make Europe a power that counts capable of protecting its citizens.

The time has come to create a European federal government, starting with a Franco-German government, responsible for defense, diplomacy, industry, research and the environment. . While 30% of French and Germans are in favor of setting up a European government, and 30% are against, leaders in France and Germany still refuse this solution. This is due to their lack of vision, their lack of competence and their lack of political courage. This penalizes all European citizens and undermines their economic and security interests. 

Week 18, Year 2021

The results of European construction.


The week of May 9 is an opportunity to commemorate and celebrate the Schuman Declaration, which constitutes the first stage of institutional European construction.

When one examines the record of European integration since 1950 and the creation of the ECSC, one is forced to admit that the progress made is significant and decisive. But we are also obliged to recognize that this progress is very insufficient to face the challenges of today.

Agricultural policy, regional policy, trade policy, the large internal market and monetary policy have brought European citizens a surplus of economic growth, standard of living, social protection and financial solidity such as Europe has become. one of the most advanced regions of the world.


Without the common agricultural policy, there will be no efficient, self-sufficient and exporting European agriculture. Without European regional policy, whole swathes of European territory would remain abandoned, shrinking the size of the European market and increasing social problems. Without European trade policy, each European state would negotiate in a very weak position vis-à-vis the USA, China and regional powers, which would penalize their exports and their standard of living.


Without the large European internal market, growth in Europe would be several points lower, innovation would be weakened due to trade and technological barriers. Corporate profits and household incomes would be significantly lower. The fiscal resources and the debt capacity of European states would not allow them to provide their citizens with the current level of social protection.


What if Europeans had to face the 2008 financial crisis without the Euro and the Covid crisis without the ECB. It is indisputable that the cost of borrowing on the financial markets for France and Italy, for example, would have increased considerably due to the fall in tax revenues. This would have caused a devaluation of the franc and the lira, leading to a further rise in the cost of debt. to a probable default on the part of these states and to an economic depression.



But this positive aspect of European construction is insufficient because it does not compensate for the serious shortcomings of the European Union. These shortcomings are manifested mainly in the areas of financial transfers, industry, defense and diplomacy. These shortcomings prevent Europeans from benefiting from the prosperity and security to which they legitimately aspire.


We have explained that the existence of the euro and the action of the ECB constitute major assets for European countries, including those located outside the euro area thanks to the increased financial stability of trade and growth they generate.


But the existence of the euro also presents a major drawback. The creditor countries, those which export to other European countries, such as Germany, consider that they are accumulating debts on debtor countries which will not be able to honor their debts, especially if the euro zone breaks up as what happened with Greece. Unable to finance its deficit and pay off its debt, Greece could no longer repay the loans granted by the ECB, endangered the quality of the assets held by the European system of central banks, risked sinking into a damaging economic depression for exports from other European countries and threatened to exit the euro, thus causing a crisis of monetary and institutional confidence. This leads the creditor countries to reduce their risk vis-à-vis debtor European countries by demanding the limitation or the end of loans granted by the ECB and the reduction of public operating and investment spending by debtor countries


Debtor countries for their part deplore the significant financial transfers to creditor countries and their relative impoverishment vis-à-vis these countries. They therefore demand financial transfers from the European Union. Some of their political forces even advocate leaving the euro zone in order to be able to devalue their currency and thus strengthen their competitiveness to reduce their trade deficit, even if this should put an end to the large European market.

These latent tensions between European debtor and creditor countries can, in the event of external financial or security shocks, or in the event of an internal social or political shock, increase sharply and lead to a rapid exit from the euro zone of certain countries, in particular. creditor countries which will no longer wish to continue financing the rest of Europe.
​
Industry in Europe is penalized by a neo-liberal ideological approach taken by the majority of European officials and the European Commission, which claims that trade helps guarantee peace and ensure economic development. This ideology is unrealistic. Trade linked to the protection of local producers and the opening of foreign markets, which are political elements that no government can ignore. Moreover, trade is by no means the only parameter that influences peace. Internal security, influence abroad, territorial expansion, national prestige each play an equally important, if not more important role in political life. As the European Commission is responsible for the application of the rules governing the European internal market, its neo-liberal ideology often leads it to think that the most important thing is to offer the consumer the cheapest possible access to products whatever their origin, which does not fail to penalize European industry. And the commission cannot coordinate, rationalize or direct the industrial policies of each European state because they remain sovereign in this field and they generally defend their particular interests. This situation is slowing down European growth and reducing the standard of living in Europe.

European diplomatic policy presents a very negative result. It suffers first of all from a lack of credibility since each European state remains master of its diplomatic orientations and the EU can only act by virtue of a unanimous vote. This prevents, for example, European countries from pursuing a united policy in North Africa, in the face of American demands concerning Russian gas or even concerning Chinese investments in Europe.
European diplomacy then suffers from a lack of efficiency resulting from its very limited resources. The only weapon the EU and European countries can use are economic sanctions, given the military weakness of each European state and the lack of a European army. But a policy of economic sanctions which cannot be backed up by diplomatic and military policies is incapable of impressing powerful countries and cannot force any country to give up interests it deems essential.

Finally, European diplomatic policy lacks fairness. This is the result of the military weakness of Europeans and their dependence on the USA, in particular to ensure the security of their eastern border. As a result, American interests are systematically privileged by Europeans, who behave most of the time and for the most part of them as auxiliaries to American power. This is how no European sanctions against the US were taken following the 2003 war in Iraq, based on a lie and which destabilized the entire region. Thus, no European sanction followed the withdrawal of the USA from the Iranian nuclear agreement or its sanctions decreed against the Nord Stream 2 pipeline. This gives European sanctions an unjust and unbalanced character in the eyes. of public opinion and leaders of many countries, which reduces European influence in the world.

The common European security and defense policy is almost non-existent, except on paper. European battle groups, task forces and rapid action forces do not have the means to act because of their serious shortcomings in logistics, equipment, training and command. And especially because of the absence of a European political power capable of deciding without needing the agreement of all European countries to intervene in a conflict.

The time has come to create a European federal government, starting with a Franco-German government, responsible for defense, diplomacy, industry, research and the environment. . While 30% of French and Germans are in favor of setting up a European government, and 30% are against, leaders in France and Germany still refuse this solution. This is due to their lack of vision, their lack of competence and their lack of political courage. This penalizes all European citizens and undermines their economic and security interests. ​ 

Week 17, Year 2021

Europe and crime

Reactionary and nationalist generals have tried to weaken French and European institutions by evoking on April 21, 2021 a military intervention in France which may have started without the approval of political power. According to them, Islamism and criminality, associated with laxity and hatred, threaten the unity of France and make this intervention inevitable, if nothing changes.

We have already spoken of the failure of the strategy of Islamist terrorists in Europe, who seek to pit communities against each other. Community tensions have not increased in Europe for 20 years and the majority of immigrants are integrated.

As regards crime, this question must be examined without amalgamation and at European level, given the high degree of interdependence between European countries.

First, let us specify that even a European government, local European states will remain masters of their penal policy, as is the case in the USA. Police and justice remain primarily the responsibility of European countries. and will therefore not experience any fundamental changes.

However, two essential elements will complete the current European criminal organization.

First of all, penal policies can be much better harmonized in Europe. This is thanks to the significant legislative and financial incentives available to the European federal government. This is necessary to conduct an effective penal policy taking into account the free movement of people, goods and capital in Europe. In the United States, federal legislation and the financial, human and political resources of the American federal government make it possible to encourage the American States to adopt similar preventive or repressive measures even if in some rather rare cases disparities deumeur, for example concerning the sentence of dead.

Then the European federal government will have a small federal police force and a European federal prosecutor who will be able to prosecute and punish offenses directed against the European federal state. These prosecutions will be more numerous and more important than those which are currently launched with the European public prosecutor's office and Europol to fight against crimes against the EU. As in the United States, federal prosecutions will considerably strengthen the fight against particularly serious offenses such as cross-border crime, espionage and corruption.

What should be the priorities of European criminal policy?

First of all, the fight against gratuitous violence. Then the fight against venal violence causing harm to people not involved in illicit activities, that is to say the fight against banditry. These struggles must be improved through community policing, strengthening of the non-administrative police force, improving police training, increasing the digitalization of police forces and raising awareness among citizens.

The fight against trafficking when it has given no results for 30 years and trafficking does not generally increase violence against people not involved in illicit activities. This trafficking provides support for certain strata of underprivileged populations, mechanically limiting the violence from these populations. But this solution is obviously not satisfactory. To fight effectively against trafficking, it is therefore necessary to put an end to trafficking by controlling the consumption of narcotics through medicalization. It is also necessary to gradually reintegrate the people involved in trafficking through a social policy and a targeted, efficient and ambitious training policy.

Drug use and prostitution cannot be eradicated as the prohibition episode in the United States once could. This is also demonstrated by the rise in drug trafficking and the persistence of prostitution, even in the most repressive countries. Such bans also lead to a significant deterioration in health and safety conditions. It is therefore necessary in these areas, as for tobacco, to adopt a policy of medical prevention and territorial delimitation.

Regarding soft drugs, prevention, awareness and medico-psychological training courses should be compulsory in order to have access to the product. With regard to hard drugs, an obligation of care and progressive detoxification should be required in order to have access to them. People addicted to alcohol or gambling could also be cared for in a similar way. Prostitution should be medically and administratively regulated and controlled.

This will allow European states to significantly reduce the health damage linked to these activities and to generate income from these activities.

Drug trafficking, the exploitation of prostitution and the organization of illicit gambling must be more closely monitored and must continue to be repressed in order to have sources of all kinds of information, to reduce the settling of scores and to fight against trafficking in human beings. To achieve this, it is necessary to infiltrate mafias, rockers, clans and gangs. These groups more often have links with banditry and they sometimes have contacts with Islamist, anarchist, environmental or nationalist terrorist groups.

Finally, to create jobs and to fight against illegal activities and to encourage tourists to come to Europe rather than Las Vegas or Macao, a vast complex of casinos, hotels and entertainment should be created. , undoubtedly in Spain, by using European know-how in these fields and by adding the critical size necessary to be competitive at the international level.

But this European penal policy cannot see the light of day without the political will and the material resources of a European federal government.

​The time has come to create a European federal government, starting with a Franco-German government, responsible for defense, diplomacy, industry, research and the environment. . While 30% of French and Germans are in favor of setting up a European government, and 30% are against, leaders in France and Germany still refuse this solution. This is due to their lack of vision, their lack of competence and their lack of political courage. This penalizes all European citizens and undermines their economic and security interests. 


Week 16, Year 2021

Should we create a sovereign European assembly?

Some propose, like Thomas Piketty, to create a European assembly which can decide on its own, therefore without needing the approval of European heads of government. This assembly would be made up of elected representatives of European citizens, it would be competent for research, industry and infrastructure issues and it would be endowed with significant own resources (around 4% of European GDP).

The aim of this federal-type solution is to get out of the current ineffective confederal structure of the European Union, by creating an institution endowed with significant resources and the capacity to decide alone, therefore sovereignly. The main advantage of this solution is that it does not require a modification of the European treaties, since this European assembly can be constituted with the European member countries of the EU which want it.

This solution does not require a European constitution and could make it possible to create a government and a European federal state gradually thereafter from the pole of power and power of this assembly.

It is therefore an economic type federalism, which does not provoke a debate concerning the identity of the European super nation (characterized in particular by Romanity, Germanity, Christianity and rationality) since the main attributes of national power like defense and diplomacy are not concerned. This economic federalism makes it possible to create an embryo of a European federal government in the form of an assembly system which could then take the form of a parliamentary system with an executive.

Despite these notable advantages, this European assembly will in reality be politically much more difficult to set up than a true European federal government for two reasons.
  
First, this solution is not attractive enough for voters. It does not create a European power through a strong European government and through essential common goods of the military, diplomacy and industrial policy. These commons require not only a large budget but also an exclusive or almost exclusive competence that only a European government with strong legitimacy can have. With regard to industrial policy, for example, it is necessary to be able in particular to set the rules for protecting companies and access to public contracts for all the federated European countries.

But for the political legitimacy of the European government to be strong, it must be able to act effectively thanks to a stable executive power and it must be responsible for the 3 main areas of life on the European continent, namely the army , diplomacy and industry at large. For this, the creation of a constitution and a European federal republic are necessary.

Second, the creditor countries will find that this solution favors the fiscal irresponsibility of the debtor countries. Indeed, the debtor countries will always have the possibility of creating financial transfers between European countries via their majority participation in this European assembly, even if the prohibition of financial transfers is originally planned. And this assembly, unlike a real European government, will not have the fiscal and legislative means to force local European states to be fiscally responsible. Without budgetary resources at least equal to those of local states, without the capacity to modify the resources and expenditure of local states by legislative means and without a strong political legitimacy and without a virtual monopoly on the armed forces to deter tax revolts , this is impossible.

This idea of ​​a sovereign European assembly takes up the idea put forward by Emmanuel Macron of an assembly of the euro zone deciding alone and capable of launching infrastructure projects and large investments thanks to its own resources.

This proposal had met with the rejection of the creditor countries for lack of credibility and it was not supported by the political forces and the voters for lack of attractiveness.

It will undoubtedly be more difficult to convince the voters to create a sovereign European assembly than to create a true sovereign European federal government because the voters will not perceive well its usefulness and will wonder about its effectiveness. And to create this assembly, it will not be possible to be satisfied with a vote of parliamentarians in France or the Netherlands, given the important fiscal and budgetary issues linked to the creation of a European assembly.

Only a European government responsible for diplomacy, the army and industry and with a strong executive can be attractive to voters thanks to the extra power, growth and prestige it can bring in a competitive world and dangerous.

It is therefore necessary to found a European federal government responsible for the major sovereign (army and diplomacy) and economic (industry, research) areas, with a budget of at least 1.5 trillion euros, i.e. 8% of GDP) and possessing a stable and strong executive.

These three conditions are also essential to enable it to impose its authority in Europe and to avoid a dispersion of resources and powers between the European Union, the European assembly, national European states, and European local communities. This dispersion largely explains the inefficiency and powerlessness of Europeans. The creation of a European assembly would further increase this dispersion and consequently the financial irresponsibility in Europe, which triggered the eurozone crisis in 2011.
 
The ineffectiveness of the method of creating a European assembly also makes it possible to understand why enhanced cooperation within the framework of the European Union is almost non-existent. The advantages for European countries of making policies in small groups are not sufficient when the federal budgetary, political and legislative means do not exist. For the same reasons, European permanent structured defense cooperation has very little effect.

​The time has come to create a European federal government, starting with a Franco-German government, responsible for defense, diplomacy, industry, research and the environment. . While 30% of French and Germans are in favor of setting up a European government, and 30% are against, leaders in France and Germany still refuse this solution. This is due to their lack of vision, their lack of competence and their lack of political courage. This penalizes all European citizens and undermines their economic and security interests

Week 15, Year 2021,

With which countries to found the European government ?

When discussing the process of creating a European federal government responsible for defense, diplomacy and industry, it is first necessary to know with which European countries such a government should be created. It is then necessary to know which European countries such a government is intended to incorporate.

Some believe that the European government should be created not only with all European countries, especially members of the EU, but also with countries on the fringes of Europe such as Russia or Turkey. As Russia or Turkey will never agree to relinquish their military, diplomatic or industrial sovereignty in favor of a European government, this path is unworkable. It is a path generally defended by supporters of Russian influence in Europe, as a substitute for American influence to compensate for the lack of self-confidence and the lack of political will of Europeans.

Others believe that the European federal government should be created in all European countries at the same time, so as not to favor one group of countries to the detriment of another. This method is unrealistic because it will be very difficult to convince all European governments to create a federal government and it will be even more difficult to obtain the agreement of all European peoples, directly or through their representatives, for this. project.

Still others believe that the European federal government should be created with a small group of countries, among those most favorable and most essential to European integration. This path is realistic and it is the one that has the most chances of success, but it must be specified.

All studies show that France, Germany and the Benelux countries are on average more favorable than Italy, Spain or Poland to the creation of a European government. Moreover, it is indisputable that without France or without Germany a government and a European federal state are not viable, for economic reasons and for strategic reasons. Moreover, without France or without Germany, the European government will not represent a power that matters and will therefore not be attractive to citizens and voters.

The European federal government must therefore be created at least with France and with Germany. The question is whether we should ask the Benelux countries and perhaps Italy to participate in this foundation. This is to avoid seeing the French and the Germans alone within a federal structure that could lead to tensions between the two populations and to strengthen the economic and geopolitical coherence of the government thus constituted.

As far as Italy is concerned, obtaining the agreement of this large country which is rather unstable and not essential to found the European government will be difficult and will therefore reduce the chances of success of the process. This will also make this creation more uncertain in the eyes of voters because the greater the number of countries required. the less the chances of success. This can demobilize citizens.

Adding the Benelux countries to the creation of the European federal government also has drawbacks.

First of all, the weight of the French and the Germans in the federal structure will remain preponderant and Franco-German antagonism can therefore always arise. Then obtaining the approval of the governments of the Benelux and the agreement of the peoples of the Benelux will not be as easy as it seems, in particular because of the possible American pressures on Belgium or the Netherlands which are very Atlanticist because of their small size. Finally, since the ratification process requires the agreement of the 5 countries, it will be in the eyes of citizens more risky than if the agreement of France and Germany were sufficient.

The founding of the European federal government with only France and Germany presents some significant advantages.

First, getting the agreement of 2 countries instead of 5 is easier and therefore more motivating for voters. Secondly, the federal dynamic generated by the creation of the Franco-German government will very probably make it possible to influence and integrate the Benelux countries quickly and easily. This federal dynamic, reinforced with the incorporation of the Benelux countries, will then make it possible to incorporate quite easily and quickly enough more distant and more important countries such as Italy, Spain and Poland, to finally incorporate the rest of the member countries of EU: In the medium or long term, the reintegration of the United Kingdom into the EU, see an integration of the United Kingdom in the European federal government will become possible thanks to the pro-European dynamic thus unleashed in Europe and thanks to the power and the attractiveness of the European federal government, based on the principle of subsidiarity.

Federal political dynamics should prevent any resurgence of Germanophobia or Francophobia by giving the French and the Germans a common goal of rapidly increasing the size and power of their common government by incorporating the other European countries. Even if the Germans are torn between Atlanticism and Europeanism, they remain Europeans before being Westerners. They will not hesitate to take their independence vis-à-vis the USA if Europe provides them with the means, as Schröder had done with Chirac in 2003. The Germans also know that nowadays economic power alone and that German power alone does not allow them to properly defend their commercial and strategic interests in and outside Europe.

In order to decide which group of founding countries we need, we must therefore understand the creation of the European federal government as a necessarily dynamic process and not as a static state of affairs. This very powerful dynamic federalist process engendered by the founding of a European government can continue as long as there are candidate countries for incorporation into the European Federation. The federated Europeans will decide whether they give a favorable follow-up to it by a qualified majority vote of the representatives of their local states and the representatives of the European people. In practice, this means that the countries considered to be fully European in the cultural and territorial sense alone will have the effective capacity to join the European federation.

Finally, there would be the possibility of proceeding with the ratification of the creation of the European federal government in all the member countries of the EU and of being satisfied with the agreement of France and Germany, or even with the agreement of Benelux countries, to proceed with the effective creation of the European government. This method has 2 main drawbacks. It considerably complicates the launch of the ratification process because, as this is a federal project, the agreement of the governments of European countries will be difficult to obtain, especially in countries which do not belong to the Carolingian European heart. And the countries that rejected incorporation into the European federal government during the ratification process will have a much harder time agreeing to join it later, which will have the effect of greatly reducing the federalist dynamic induced by the creation of the European Union. European government. "

We therefore have to create the European federal government starting with a Franco-German government.

The time has come to create a European federal government, starting with a Franco-German government, responsible for defense, diplomacy, industry, research and the environment. . While 30% of French and Germans are in favor of setting up a European government, and 30% are against, leaders in France and Germany still refuse this solution. This is due to their lack of vision, their lack of competence and their lack of political courage. This penalizes all European citizens and undermines their economic and security interests



Week 14, Year 2021,

European construction and peace


The first step in the construction of Europe was the Briand Kellog Pact of 1928 and the Birand-Stresemann proposal of 1929. This pact and this porposal embodied the will of France and Germany to avoid a new European war and to constitute a European pole of power.


However, the stammering European construction of 1929 did not make it possible to overcome the intra-European antagonisms inherited from a conflicting past that was too close. Due to the Treaty of Versailles and the great economic depression of the 1930s and war in Europe broke out again in 1939. During this war Germany was not able to organize Europe after having one. conquered because of its criminal Nazi policy and because of its strategic mistakes.


Consequently, it was the Americans and the Soviets, the main victors of Nazi Germany, who were responsible for organizing international policy in Europe after 1945. Defense and diplomacy issues in Eastern Europe were supervised. by the USSR until 1991. These questions in Western Europe are dealt with under the de facto direction of the USA, notably with NATO. Since 1991 the US has also been leading the diplomatic and military orientation of Eastern European countries.


Peace on the Continent was therefore mainly secured by American hegemony in Europe. This hegemony is notably based on American indirect control over the defense of Federal Germany, the main European power. Germany cannot possess nuclear weapons and cannot equip itself with an army exceeding 360,000 men, it remains dependent on the United States for its protection, in particular to ensure the protection of the eastern border of the European continent, which is for it is very important because its economy is highly integrated with that of countries in eastern europe.


The fact that the US ensures political stability and the pacification of the European continent is hardly surprising. The periodic breakdown every 30 years of the European balance between European powers and the recurring war in Europe which resulted from it did not allow Europeans to experience true pacification. Pacification in Europe can only be achieved through the victory of a state imposing its hegemony over others, as in China or through a federal movement that achieves real European political unity, as in India


The fact that peace in Europe is guaranteed by American protection, and also by the intensification of European interdependence under the effect of the economic and monetary unification of most of the continent and of the cooperation between European states supported by the EU are the two main factors which allow Europeans today to envisage their political unification under the aegis of a federal government.


But these two factors do not automatically engender a process of political unification leading to the creation of a European federal government. There is no automatic process for the gradual transfer of powers and financial resources from national states to the European Commission and the European Parliament. The European Commission cannot gently transform itself into a federal government. American protection and European interdependence only facilitate the emergence of the federal unification process, which will necessarily be an eminently political process. Such a process is based on the creation and regrouping of political forces of various tendencies and various countries capable of creating a European government at the level of Europe. Without political will, you cannot create a national state or a super-national state. as the history of the USA, Switzerland, Italy, Germany and India shows. To become sustainable and efficient, Europe therefore necessarily needs a federal leap of a political nature. Such a leap is facilitated by the technocratic and economic architecture put in place by the European Union.

The nature and attitude of the US government play a significant role in the process of European political unification. When the American government is seen as antagonistic and chauvinistic by the peoples of Europe and by European elites, the will of Europeans to do without American protection and to create a federal government grows stronger. When the American government is less demanding concerning American commercial and strategic interests in Europe, the federalist will of Europeans is weakened, because Europeans then benefit from American protection at a lower cost.

Still, American protection always comes at a commercial and strategic cost. And Europeans know that a Europe independent of the USA will necessarily be a stronger Europe commercially and strategically, on European territory and also outside Europe. The USA, like China, Russia and India constitute one of the superpowers. because of their political will, their productive apparatus, their military tool and their diplomatic influence. Only a small idealistic Atlanticist media and political group believe that the US does not objectively represent an economic rival and a geopolitical competitor.

In addition, it is absolutely not certain that the USA will have the will to dominate and organize Europe for long. Abrupt and far-reaching electoral changes are frequent in the United States, American priorities shift in favor of the peaceful zone and Europe constitutes for the United States a much more serious economic competitor than Russia.

To benefit from the economic and security advantages of a strong power, to perpetuate peace in Europe and to put an end to indirect American supervision, Europeans must therefore have a federal government.

​The time has come to create a European federal government, starting with a Franco-German government, responsible for defense, diplomacy, industry, research and the environment. . While 30% of French and Germans are in favor of setting up a European government, and 30% are against, leaders in France and Germany still refuse this solution. This is due to their lack of vision, their lack of competence and their lack of political courage. This penalizes all European citizens and undermines their economic and security interests

Week 13, Year 2021

Migration policy and the demographic problem of Europe.

Migration policy cannot come under the national competence of each European state alone because of the very important European economic and human interdependence. The single European market, the free movement of people in Europe and Schengen make national migration policies ineffective and a European migration policy must therefore be put in place.

But as each European state remains sovereign over major issues, and therefore necessarily with regard to its migration policy and border control, European migration policy must be conducted by coordinating and supporting the action of European states, without power. replace their action.

This poses considerable problems.

For example, countries of entry which are only transit countries for migrants because they are the least wealthy have no interest in retaining migrants on their soil and therefore do not seek to protect their borders effectively, which makes them less wealthy. pushes not to entrust the protection of their border to Frontex, except in a marginal way.
The countries of destination, for their part, seek to protect their borders against flows from southern European countries and therefore do not want to entrust Frontex, which is an ineffective party, with the protection of European borders. by giving up the possibility of controlling their borders with police forces.

Frontex cannot therefore replace the national border police forces because each State wants to retain control of its borders and its migration policy. The 10,000 Frontex personnel, 2/3 of whom are made available by the Member States, cannot replace the 50,000 police officers serving the national states and who guarantee their territorial sovereignty.

There is also the problem of asylum which leads to numerous abuses and an increase in illegal immigration. The right to asylum must be more specific and is mainly limited to persecution. It must also be harmonized to avoid the right of asylum tourism in Europe and it must be better organized not to allow asylum seekers to disappear in the territory.
There is also a labor problem. This immigration must be more targeted for all European countries in order to avoid the entry of unskilled migrants who sometimes are not looking for work.
There is also the problem of student immigration, which must be intensified to attract talent, including to the countries of origin of migrants, in order to encourage these countries to take back their illegals and control their emigration.
Finally, there is the problem of family reunification, the current impact of which does not seem enormous. Family reunification must be taken into account to measure the impact on the European population mix, between recent migrants, recent citizens and established citizens.
Harmonization of European policies in all these areas cannot be achieved until there is a federal European government with significant legislative, incentive and communication resources.

The support powers of the European Union in the field of migration and borders only make it possible to coordinate the actions of the Member States, to network their administrations and to provide additional funding. It is better than nothing, but it does not make it possible to conduct a uniform and therefore effective European migration policy.

One of the objectives of European migration policy must be to keep the level of immigration at the current and low level.
Migration at a current and low level makes it possible to maintain the number of Europeans by filling the deficit in the demographic balance. If fertility and the demographic balance go up, then it will also be possible to increase the level of immigration so that the Europe is increasing its population, which is an advantage for growth and innovation, although it is not the only one.

This is also necessary given the difficulties of integration for a small part of the migrants,

To succeed in limiting immigration, it is necessary to conclude immigration agreements with the country of origin, with third countries (Turkey, Libya ...), it is necessary to conduct a single European migration policy and it is necessary to control the borders in a centralized manner. This requires the creation of a European federal government responsible for its immigration policy and the protection of its borders.
The Franco-German government cannot be responsible for migration policy in Europe because it is the Schengen area and European migration agreements that remain the most effective in the absence of a European immigration policy and single borders for all. European countries. It is only when the vast majority of European countries have been integrated into the European federal state that immigration and borders will have to be placed under the responsibility of the European federal government.

Is there a risk of war between European countries and of secession due to the migration policy that would be conducted by the European federal government? If we rule out the hypothesis of a totally lax migration policy which is no longer on the agenda, even in Germany, and if we rule out the hypothesis of a total closure policy which is not compatible with Realities, there is no reason to think that migration policy could deeply divide Europeans. The political and economic consequences of the question of the abolition of slavery in the United States were much more profound.

The ambitious family policy must be supported at European level to complete the migration policy, one of the objectives of which is to put an end to the negative demographic balance in Europe without modifying the major balances of the European population mix.

To boost the birth rate of European citizens, it is also necessary to conduct a proactive and ambitious family policy, by massively increasing aid for children, in particular by improving childcare conditions, facilitating mothers' return to work and strengthening the image of the mother in society.
Family policy will remain the responsibility of local European states
But unlike the European Union, which does not have powerful budgetary and legislative resources in key areas, a European federal government will be able, thanks to strong incentives, to effectively converge the family policies of the various European countries to obtain satisfactory results.

​The time has come to create a European federal government, starting with a Franco-German government, responsible for defense, diplomacy, industry, research and the environment. . While 30% of French and Germans are in favor of setting up a European government, and 30% are against, leaders in France and Germany still refuse this solution. This is due to their lack of vision, their lack of competence and their lack of political courage. This penalizes all European citizens and undermines their economic and security interests

Week 12, Year 2021

The problem of European fiscal policy 

A budgetary policy conducted on a European scale would make it possible to support European growth through consumer spending in a period of economic slowdown, as is the case in China and the USA. These countries have growth rates that are systematically higher than European growth rates. A European budgetary policy would also make it possible to increase investment spending in European projects, for example in the river, energy, digital, industrial or research fields to fill the European investment gap.

This European investment deficit exists because private capital is directed primarily towards public debt to the detriment of bonds or shares issued by European companies, which is one of the reasons for the low cost of public debt in Europe. European public investments would have the advantage of attracting private capital to companies by reassuring European investors whose risk appetite is low.

Unfortunately, the European Union and European countries currently do not have a fiscal policy. Each European country establishes and votes its budget independently and the EU budget represents less than 3% of the total public expenditure of European countries. Given the financial challenges and the political debate specific to each European state, no concerted and effective budgetary policy at European level is possible.

It is true that with the Coronavirus crisis, the EU borrowed nearly 500 billion euros but this European debt was authorized by the heads of European governments on an exceptional basis and only to face the economic and health consequences of the pandemic. Germany, Austria, the Netherlands or Denmark will not agree to renew this debt capacity when the health crisis is over.

To have a European budgetary policy, a European political institution must therefore become responsible for the areas that European states can no longer deal with alone, therefore for defense, diplomacy, industry and the environment.

This European political institution must have its own resources to finance its missions and the capacity to take on debt to finance investment expenditure, which will enable it to conduct an effective budgetary policy.

Where should the own resources of this European political institution come from?

A European institution responsible for questions of defense, diplomacy, industry and the environment needs a budget of around 1500 billion euros per year, as is the case in the USA.

This funding can come from tax revenues traditionally collected by federal states. income tax, corporation tax and customs duties. As the amounts collected in respect of these taxes will be higher than necessary, a retrocession to local authorities and local states will be necessary.

As a first step, the European federal government must not be authorized to create new federal taxes, nor be authorized to modify the base and the rate of these taxes without obtaining the agreement of the local European States.

The capacity to take on debt should be limited to investment expenditure to avoid a significant increase in the level of debt relative to GDP, which is detrimental in the long run for budget financing because of the cost of debt service. . But a budget surplus must be systematically organized and planned in times of economic growth in order to have funds capable of supporting investment and consumption in times of recession.

How can we succeed in creating a European budget to finance the missions that only Europe can effectively carry out?

Some believe that it is necessary to add specific resources to the current European budget (carbon tax, plastic tax, part of VAT, part of corporate tax) and that the development of this budget should be entrusted to the European Council acting by qualified majority, under the control of the European Parliament which does not have sufficient legitimacy on its own.

This solution is unrealistic. The citizens cannot agree to entrust a significant budget to an assembly of head of government irresponsible to the voters via the mechanism of majority decision. This institutional semi-federalism seeks to circumvent the difficulty of creating a democratic and responsible European federal government, but that is not possible. Tax matters like military matters are eminently political matters which can only be dealt with by a legitimate and politically responsible government, otherwise paralysis will manifest itself immediately.

The European Council should therefore be accountable to the European Parliament, but this is impossible because the weak legitimacy of the European Parliament does not allow it to challenge the authority of the heads of government of European countries. Even if the president of the European Commission which manages the European budget were accountable to the European Parliament, the European Council would remain a fundamentally irresponsible body. Its political and electoral heterogeneity does not allow voters to bring about a change of majority within the European Council, unlike what happens, for example, in the United States during senatorial elections.

We must therefore choose the path of political federalism, that which advocates the creation of a genuine European government responsible for major issues. This European federal and democratic government must be constituted with a few founding countries, at night France and Germany Such a government will have the legitimacy to manage an important budget and to decide on fiscal policy because its creation will have been approved by the European peoples and because he will be accountable to European voters. To say that the cultural differences, for example between French and German, do not allow the creation of a democratic European government is demagogic: the ECB constitutes a federal European monetary government where leaders from various European cultures work perfectly. This is also the case in Switzerland, Belgium, Canada, and in the European Commission.

There is also the specter of a possible European war of secession. It is true that this risk exists but it seems very low. There is no question on which the Europeans cannot agree, contrary to the immense economic and political questions that the escalvage problem generated in the USA.

We also hear that the referendum on the Euro was only approved by a narrow majority of French people and that a referendum on the creation of a Franco-German federal government would probably fail. This is to forget that the creation of the euro was not associated for the voters with any important advantage while all citizens immediately understand that a European federal government responsible for industrial, defense and environmental issues is an asset. indisputable for their security and for their prosperity.

What quality and price will the debt issued by the European federal government have?

Because of the size, competitiveness and diversity of the European economy, European debt will be of very good quality. In addition, geopolitical factors through defense and finally centralized, credible and effective European diplomacy will further strengthen the quality of European debt.

The cost of European debt should therefore drop significantly compared to the current cost.

This decrease would result in a significant dominance of public and private borrowing rates in Europe, which in the medium and long term may represent savings of several points of gross domestic product per year given the significant weight of debt service in the economy. European budgets and the size of the European bond market.

These significant financial savings will make it possible in particular to finance a significant European federal defense budget to give Europe the means to defend its independence, its commercial interests, its influence and its prestige, which always has significant economic and social consequences.​

​The time has come to create a European federal government, starting with a Franco-German government, responsible for defense, diplomacy, industry, research and the environment. . While 30% of French and Germans are in favor of setting up a European government, and 30% are against, leaders in France and Germany still refuse this solution. This is due to their lack of vision, their lack of competence and their lack of political courage. This penalizes all European citizens and undermines their economic and security interests

Week 11, Year 2021

Do we need a single European research policy?

The industrial growth rate in Europe is not good. This is the result of the absence of a European industrial policy capable of creating and supporting European champions and harnessing research results through successful industrial development. 

But as far as the research situation in Europe is concerned, it is often judged to be satisfactory. The reason for this are the many technological discoveries and developments that are taking place in Europe, be it in the fields of biotech, AI, nanotechnology, robotics, aviation or electromobility.

Still the reality looks different. The research situation in Germany, France and the EU: regarding publications and patents is worrying. And a single European research budget and policy would significantly improve this situation.

The situation is worrying, firstly, because scientific publications from Europe are on the decline. In 2000, 33% of the scientific publications came from the EU. In 2016 only 27%. In contrast, South Korean publications increased from 3% to 5% from 2000 to 2026.

Second, because patents originating in Europe are going back. In 2000, 35% of new patents were registered in the EU. in 2016 only 25% were registered in the EU. On the contrary, iSud Korea registered 1% of new patents a in 2000, and 6% in 2016.

Despite increasing research spending in EU countries, and high research spending as a percentage of European GDP, research results in the EU have deteriorated. It is therefore necessary to create an effective research system in Europe.

This can be significantly improved by a single European research policy.

A single research policy in Europe would allow clear priority in research directions, funding and human resources. That will show positive results through better performance and increased resources. When, for example, research funding and research development in different directions are subordinated in France and Germany, this cannot lead to very positive results. face the need of modern science and technology. In China, the technological gap is gradually being compensated for by centralized control of funding, human resources and research directions. That is also the case in South Korea. In the USA, federal research spending and federal agencies such as DARPA and BARDA steer research development through financial aid and preferential access to public markets in the USA and in countries affiliated with the USA. This enables the USA to have an effective research policy. This is impossible today in Europe because of the dispersion of research expenditures in the various Eu countries and the inability to guarantee preferential access to all European public markets for European products.

There is also the question of the EU's research policy. These resources drawn from European countries should create a kind of common European research policy through European research project and cooperation between European countries in research and development areas. But these policies do not provide sufficient coherence and efficiency for research in Europe because its resources are limited and its authority over the European states in the field of research does not exist. This is why the eu research policy is in part a cause of the fragmentation and efficiency