EU
Parliament President Schulz: 'The Situation in Europe Is Extremely
Concerning'
In
an interview, European Parliament President Martin Schulz says he is
more concerned about the state of the European Union than he has ever
been. Solidarity, he believes, is eroding and nation-state
parochialism is on the rise.
Interview Conducted
by Horand Knaup and Peter Müller
December 01, 2015
SPIEGEL: Mr. Schulz,
you have been a member of European Parliament for 21 years. During
that time, has the European Union ever been in as poor shape as it is
today?
Schulz: No.
Unambiguously no! Europe hasn't failed yet, but the situation is
extremely concerning.
SPIEGEL: What
exactly do you mean?
Schulz: Europe was
founded as a community bound together by solidarity. Member states
agreed to work together closely because they knew that together, we
are stronger. Now we are experiencing a wave of eroding solidarity,
first of certain societies and then entire governments. At the same
time, we have two giant new challenges to meet: the migration
movement and terror. And then Great Britain is thinking about leaving
the EU. That should suffice as a description.
SPIEGEL: An article
of faith in EU politics has long been that Europe grows closer
together in crisis. Now, the opposite seems to be true.
Schulz: We are in
the middle of a tough, ideological conflict that is being waged
across the entire continent. On the one side are those who say that
global challenges like migration and terror cannot be met with
national parochialism. On the other side are those who would like to
see a renaissance of the nation-state.
SPIEGEL: We suspect
you belong to the first group, the minority.
Schulz: I believe
that the majority of people in Europe want to demonstrate solidarity
with the refugees. We have seen that in the overwhelming willingness
to help. Sometimes one gets the impression that the people are much
more advanced on this question than their governments.
SPIEGEL: If you talk
to people from Poland, Denmark or France, their desire to help
refugees is just as limited as that of their governments.
Schulz: Particularly
in periods of crisis, governments have the obligation to lead by good
example! Instead, many in Europe are confronting this global
challenge with a penny-pinching mentality that drives me crazy.
SPIEGEL: Germany
seems to be rediscovering the EU again in exactly the moment that the
country is facing such pressure from the high number of refugees
flowing into the country. When the focus was on the euro and the
Greeks, the German government had a completely different demeanor:
arrogant and uncompromising.
Schulz: Not the
entire government ...
SPIEGEL: Who then?
Schulz: Only those
who were recently content to flex their muscles in Germany -- and who
were extremely eager to force others to follow the German model. It
may be cynical, but it's payback time in Brussels and Germany is
bearing the consequences for this behavior. Angela Merkel took a
courageous step on the refugee issue ...
SPIEGEL: ... and she
is being faced with significant headwind in Brussels.
Schulz: The stubborn
stance of some European governments on the refugee question is a
reprisal less aimed at Angela Merkel or (Vice Chancellor) Sigmar
Gabriel than at certain people on Wilhelmstrasse in Berlin.
SPIEGEL: Which is
where Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble has his office.
Schulz: He is, for
many, a controversial figure.
SPIEGEL: The German
finance minister demands that our European partners follow the rules,
such as the Stability and Growth Pact. What's wrong with that?
Schulz: Of course
the rules apply. But if you constantly insist only on your own
interpretation, it isn't long before it seems patronizing. Following
the attacks in Paris, French President François Hollande has a
completely different set of concerns. France needs more police, more
security personnel and a greater emphasis on integration. He says
that security is more important than the Stability Pact.
SPIEGEL: The French,
too, have largely let Germany deal with the refugee crisis alone. And
the new Polish prime minister said shortly after assuming office that
Germany caused the refugee crisis itself.
Schulz: It is a
European problem and solidarity is the fundamental idea of European
cooperation. If a country feels itself to be militarily threatened
and calls for soldiers, weapons and sanctions, then that's what it
gets. When governments say they need money from the structural funds
to stabilize their economy, that's what they get. But you can't
cherry pick solidarity.
SPIEGEL: Still,
Angela Merkel's decision at the end of August to open up the borders
to Syrians was very unilateral. There was no warning given to, nor
consultation with, Germany's neighbors.
Schulz: Certainly
Ms. Merkel could have communicated more effectively with the French
and the Poles. At that moment, we were facing an acute humanitarian
crisis situation that demanded immediate action. But that isn't the
core of the problem. We all have to accept accusations that we
ignored the refugee crisis for far too long. The first time that I
referred to the Mediterranean Sea as Europe's cemetery was in October
2013, when hundreds of people drowned off Lampedusa. Italians,
Maltese, Greeks and Spaniards have been pleading for help for years.
But nobody cared. The answer was always that we had the Dublin
Regulation (which stipulates that all asylum applications must be
processed in the country where a refugee first arrives) and that the
Italians needed to conform to it.
SPIEGEL: And how can
we get Eastern European countries to show more solidarity?
Schulz: At the
moment, it's like this: We have committed ourselves to pursue joint
policies, but then national governments say, "We aren't bound by
that." That is a dramatic situation, because solidarity is a
basic principle that cannot be had on an à la carte basis. If we
have rules that nobody adheres to, then the community will break
apart.
SPIEGEL: Among the
German populace, there is little understanding for the fact that
Germany is the largest net contributor to the EU (meaning it pays
more in than it gets back in subsidies), yet Eastern European member
states refuse to accept any refugees in return.
Schulz: There are
ways to demand solidarity. One example: The new Polish government
would like more EU funds for its farmers. Medium-term financial
planning requires unanimity. Those who want something will have to
offer something in return -- such as solidarity in the refugee
question, for example. That is why the medium-term financial planning
is a chance to return to a joint approach.
SPIEGEL: Or to have
a falling out.
Schulz: It is more
an opportunity to correct mistakes. When we were negotiating the
ongoing financial period in 2013, I talked myself hoarse. London and
Berlin in particular insisted on reducing the budget. So we -- to the
applause of German journalists -- made cuts to central
future-oriented areas and slashed the budget for development aid,
research and technology. And now? Now we have the problems and need
money for Africa, Jordan and Turkey.
SPIEGEL: Money is
hardly the most pressing problem. Months ago, the EU agreed on the
distribution of 160,000 refugees currently sheltered in Greece and
Italy. Thus far, though, only 200 people have been redistributed.
Schulz: That is
unfortunately true. We now have two options: We can commence
operations at the Hotspots in Italy and Greece and continue to do
nothing -- in which case they would soon be overflowing. Or we can
show responsibility and organize a distribution system that takes
into account the limits of each individual member state. Migrants,
for their part, must recognize that, while they have a right to
protection, they do not have the right to freely choose the country.
In addition, it is clear: Not everybody can come to us.
SPIEGEL: Are quotas
-- the commitment to bring a certain number of people from their
countries or from refugee camps directly to Europe -- a possible
solution?
Schulz: The quota
idea is a good one, but there are two problems with it. The first is
clear: A quota system would also require all European countries to be
prepared to take refugees. And secondly: What happens when the quota
has been filled? Would we then simply tell those who are threatened,
sorry but we have to send you back?
SPIEGEL: But that is
exactly what Chancellor Merkel is negotiating with Turkish President
Recep Tayyip Erdogan: Quotas with an upper ceiling.
Schulz: We are
negotiating something completely different with Turkey. Turkey is
doing an enormous amount in the refugee question, but it can't
continue to pay for everything by itself. That is why we have to talk
to Turkey about money.
SPIEGEL: The deal,
then, is that Turkey would receive billions from the EU and in return
is supposed to close off its western borders.
Schulz: That isn't a
deal, that is a necessity that is advantageous for Turkey, Europe
and, most of all, the refugees. Refugees cost us money too when they
come to us. If we improve their living conditions in Turkey, we
create an incentive for them to stay there and not to place their
fates in the hands of smugglers.
SPIEGEL: Why should
Erdogan go along with the plan?
Schulz: Erdogan is
an adherent of realpolitik. He knows that international relations are
not built on the strength of unilateral demands, but on solutions
that are in everybody's best interest. Turkey has in interest in
finding agreement on more permissive visa requirements, it wants to
be recognized as a safe country of origin and it wants to finally
return to constructive EU accession negotiations. We Europeans decide
all of those things together.
SPIEGEL: European
solidarity is also being tested on another issue. Soon, the question
will be addressed as to whether sanctions on Russia should be
extended or not. Do sanctions still make sense when we need Russia in
the fight against Islamic State?
Schulz: I believe it
is wrong to now give Moscow a rebate on Ukraine sanctions because of
Syria. Russia must implement the Minsk Protocol and adhere to the
cease-fire in eastern Ukraine. That is the benchmark, unless we want
to lose what's left of our credibility. That has nothing to do with
the refugee crisis.
SPIEGEL: Do the
Russians have any interest at all in helping us fight Islamic State
terror, particularly after the shooting down of their military jet?
Schulz: It was a
Russian airplane that was bombed over the Sinai Peninsula. When the
Russians conduct air strikes on IS, they are doing so because they
too are threatened by terror.
SPIEGEL: Thus far,
though, the Russian air force has hardly conducted any air strikes
against IS, focusing instead on those groups fighting against Syrian
dictator Bashar Assad. That is hardly a promising foundation for
cooperation.
Schulz: That,
unfortunately, has been the case so far. We have to change that
step-by-step. If we want to defeat Islamic State, we first have to
arrive at a cease-fire agreement in Syria. Once that has been
achieved, an anti-IS coalition can be assembled, including Russia,
Saudi Arabia and Iran. That, however, will be significantly more
difficult in the wake of Turkey's downing of the Russian plane.
SPIEGEL: How
credible is such a foreign policy? Just recently, Russian President
Vladimir Putin was seen as the "bad guy." Now we are trying
to win him over as a partner as quickly as we can.
Schulz: Politics is
a dynamic process. When I was a young man in the 1970s, Yasser Arafat
had just perpetrated various terrorist attacks. Just a few years
later, after I had entered European Parliament, the same Yasser
Arafat was given the Nobel Peace Prize.
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário