Buffeted by the waves?

In the opening paragraphs of the book titled "What if Europe fails?" published last year, historian and Dutch historian and writer Geert Mak describes an incident recounted to him by the Serbian author Aleksandar Tišma. In the winter of 1999, for an unfortunate set of circumstances, Jacky, Tišma’s dog found itself stranded on a sheet of ice on the Danube. Petrified with fear it sat down on the sheet of ice slowly floating downstream. Shouting out to the dog was to no avail: it seemed to be paralysed, in a state of choc. It was only thanks to the courageous intervention of a child who grabbed it by the scruff of its neck that Jacky was rescued from this precarious situation and brought safely back to dry land. In the present framework of the European Union, Mak shares Tišma’s conclusions: "We’re stuck on a sheet of ice that went adrift, not knowing what to do, as we float downstream".Does this metaphor seem too drastic, too simplistic or perhaps even unduly pathetic? Geert Mak’s publication credentials are manifestly not those of a "Eurosceptic". But in this essay he conveys his deep unrest. Does the European integration project, based on principles of human rights and democratic values still have a chance of surviving? Is it not rather on a collision course with global "free market" and "free competition" thinking – an ideology which dismisses "normal human existence" with arrogant contempt, having long ago shed any pretensions of social concern? In the wake of the crisis people seem to be unaware victims of the course of events. "They seek refuge in what can be best described as total anesthesia". Mak sees two dangers here: people are more likely to succumb to the allure of populism (and here Mak rightly distinguishes clearly between the present situation and the populist nationalism of the 1930s); at the same time, they risk losing confidence in the basic capability of politics and politicians to deliver solutions. "That is what our ice floe looks like. It’s a good thing that we know about it. But now what do we do?" Geet Mak has no magic bullet to propose. But he does see in the current situation an opportunity for us to finally see Europe as it is, with its strengths and its weaknesses. We should ask ourselves what we want with this Europe, despite political estrangement. Instead of numbly "floating downstream" we could set the goals leading to European unity, and determine its limits. On these questions, according to Mak’s conclusions, we should base our debate. In our capacities as citizens we should revitalize politics and democracy. In order to reach this goal we need different visions, objectives and ideas, and even conflicting positions. David Cameron’s Europe speech last week is a useful contribution, if it is picked up, pursued, questioned contradicted – in other words, if it is discussed; the European debate at the BOZAR among European politicians like Sylvie Goulard, Mario Monti, Daniel Cohn-Bendit and Guy Verhofstadt is one obvious forum. It is crucial that citizens feel the urge to actively take part in this debate, for "in order to take a safe step away from the sheet of ice, we, as European citizens, need to want something ourselves – and that is also part of the problem, because we have forgotten how to want something. The financial markets have sold us on the idea that we shall not want for anything anymore. They could become our rulers because we Europeans allowed it to happen". Citizens’ political reawakening – far from being a therapeutic means to divert attention, but rather as a cure to change old, unhealthy habits – may be a precious goal for the "European Year of Citizens".