Wippl Transcript. OY: Olya Yordanyan TR: Toria Rainey JW: Joseph Wippl

Transcription

1 Wippl Transcript OY: Olya Yordanyan TR: Toria Rainey JW: Joseph Wippl OY: Welcome to the EU Futures Podcast, exploring the emerging future in Europe. I am Olya Yordanyan, an Outreach Coordinator at the BU Center for the Study of Europe. Today is March 1 st and my colleague Toria Rainey talks to Joseph Wippl, a Professor of Practice of International Relations at the BU Pardee School of Global Studies. TR: Okay, so just to talk a little bit about what the project is to get you acquainted. The aim of the EU futures project is to launch a longer-term conversation about the future of Europe about you know what next steps to take what Europe means and how these matters are important in a large global sense. If you could just introduce yourself and kind of explain your relationship with Europe? JW: My name is Joe Wippl, I teach on intelligence at the Frederick S. Pardee School of Global Studies here at Boston University. I've been here for 10 years and before then I was a career CIA officer in the Directorate of Operations, and I spent 18 years of my adult life in Europe. Specifically, 11 of those years in Germany, also three years in Austria, two years in Luxembourg, and two years in Spain, so I spent a lot of time in Europe. I was also Chief of the Europe Division for the Directorate of Operations at CIA. So, that was 3 years as well, so I m familiar with the area. TR: Okay, so I guess to just jump right in, one of the core tenets in many definitions of democracy is that of choice, so the freedom to make decisions and to determine our own futures. So, this kind of openness to the future is real key to success. And to paraphrase Claude Lefort we kind of need to gather and preserve indetermination in contrast to totalitarian societies which act against this indetermination. So, I guess my question for you is, in what ways do you find choice in a role to democracy? And have there been certain times when you've been either propelled or restrained because of choice or the lack thereof? JW: Well, I think there's a lot of countries that are democratic in the sense that people vote, but there's only a few countries in which there is a democracy under what I call the rule of law. And that essentially is limited to a few countries in Central and South America, like Costa Rica and Chile, Uruguay. Maybe in Africa, still South Africa, in the Middle East Israel but that s for Israelis. And then a few places in Asia, like Japan and Singapore, and some countries South Korea are going toward democracy with the rule of law. But most of the others are in what you call the Anglo-Saxon world: U.S. and Australia, New Zealand, and Western Europe. Gradually moving into Central Europe, but certainly not including Russia or Ukraine or Central Asia. So, essentially there is a democracy as far countries which have a rule of law there s probably only about 40 of those countries. A lot of people, a lot of countries vote, you know, engage in

2 elections, but there's no rule of law. In a couple of places that I served in like Guatemala and Mexico that really did not exist. We hope that will exist sometime but democracy is easy all you need is a vote rule of law is hard. TR: So, kind of going off of that, what barriers does this lack of rule of law? What does that create? What are kind of the downfalls of not having that system in place? JW: Well, mainly arbitrariness. As a matter of fact, you will not have your day in court. Basically, the system works on bribery, works on influence, and works on corruption. And I'm not saying that all rule of law countries are perfect anywhere or that the law is perfect. I'm just saying that basically people feel that they will be treated fairly and people can have their day in court. This is not the case in most countries of the world. TR: So, kind of thinking about the recent crises that have faced the European Union, it seems like a lot of these problem that have plagued Europe have come from sinking egocentrically. So, in what ways do you think that we can shift that focus from a narrow thinking to a more broad all-encompassing thinking? JW: Well, you know it is egocentric thinking is not unusual first of all, and it's probably less unusual in a continent in which various countries have had various different conditions. Also, the fact that, certainly in the last kind of 15 years, the economic development of the European Union I feel has been very uneven. With some countries doing very poorly, on the periphery. Like Greece, Spain, Portugal, Ireland, and even to some extent Italy. And then some countries doing, well, OK. France, the United Kingdom. And then others in the center going from Scandinavia to the Alps are doing quite well. Including Poland, and the Benelux, and Germany, Austria. So, it's been a very uneven economic development. It hasn't, in this country as well, but you know this has always has been one country for over the about 125 years, so it's quite a bit different. And I think as long as you have this system in which you have this independent longlasting tradition, when things get tough people are going to tend to, you know, feel well what we have most in common is with our own. Whether it's Austrians, or Czechs, or Polish, or French people. So, it's definitely a weaker part of the European system. TR: What ways can you imagine that would kind of bring everyone to the same level? JW: Well, I think the one that the level that usually people talk about it bringing it together, would be something you know, but it's kind of intangible. You know, they call it leadership. Well the only person who's really been providing much leadership in Europe for the past 10 years is Dr. Merkel in Germany, and that's about that really about the extent of it. The French president is very weak. The British are in a system of are they going to stay in the European Union or will they leave it? I think that also is a little bit of reflection of what you were saying you know different tradition. Said simply, the UK just has a different tradition than the continent has. And I ve always felt that Europe is not necessarily an end itself it s more like a process. It s never going to be what the United States is, but on the other hand, it will continue to progress toward the well-being of most of its citizens.

3 TR: Going back to that the whether or not there's going to continue to be a European Union and whether or not the UK has any involvement in that what are your thoughts? Just kind of a broad question. JW: Well, as far as the UK is concerned, I mean, I think it would be a mistake for them to leave the European Union. Some of the things that they've brought up like, for instance, should they be responsible for social welfare payments to people who come to the UK and seek these welfare payments out because it's part of European Union law? I can kind of sympathize with that. This seems to be something that even the European Union might want to reconsider. But on the other hand, trying to get agreements in which the European Union would still be obligated to accept British conditions even if they leave the European Union, I mean, I think are kind of not too smart and also that they would England would reduce its payments into the European Union I think is wrong. That's already been done before. They pay more into the Union then they get but, then again, they're one of the richer countries, and they get a lot out of it too that's more intangible. And I don't quite know exactly why, and their objection to it being a more going toward the closer Union and people's. I think, what does that mean? That's pretty subjective actually, and I think they can certainly live with that and maybe it's not that bad of an idea. The European Union gets criticized a lot for its kind of micromanagement issues in other European countries. And some of its justified and some of it is not. But, to date, the European Union has essentially been a big success. It s made countries more prosperous, it has done a lot for those countries that lived under Communism until 1989, like Poland and Hungary and the Czech Republic, and so on. So, it s done a lot of good across the board. And I don't know what Britain expects. I think what they would, the people who want to leave, what they expect is in an economic way we are still going to be treated the way we were before. And, other than that, we can kiss them off. Well, I think they can definitely kiss them off, but I don't think they're going to be treated the way they were before. I mean, it's pretty soon, the French president of the German Chancellor is going to say, well, we don't really need them that much - so let them do, and they can do the best they can. So, I think it's a bad idea, at any rate. TR: So, kind of harkening back to that idea of that intangible leadership, one thing that we talked a lot about, my boss, Elizabeth and I, when we were talking about the project was this kind of this way to take ourselves out of using this negative we can't this is impossible kind of language. We found that, you know, that s a really big hurdle that people face when talking about the future is their ability to realize potential possibilities or, you know, potential ways to fix problems. So, this is kind of a creative question, but if you are given a platform to reach the European community and or the global community, what would your call to arms be to kind of invite this outside of the box thinking? JW: Yeah, that's a pretty I don't know if you can actually even answer that question. The two biggest problems that Europe has at the moment is that it is had a stagnant economy for some time. And that there's very uneven economic development in Europe. And like I say either the Central part of Europe running from Scandinavia down to the Italian border - very prosperous. I just spent last summer, 6 weeks, in Germany, Austria it s really prosperous. But other parts of

4 Europe obviously are not, including Greece. That s the one issue. The second issue, of course, is this enormous push of immigration out of the Middle East and Africa into Europe which has continued unabated even during the winter months. And the fact that some countries are and have been willing to take these immigrants and others have not, and it's been virtually impossible for the Europeans to work out a common program on what to do, how many immigrants to accept. So, with some countries like Hungary and the former Soviet bloc countries, basically saying well we can't accept any to very little interest of immigrants going to France and Spain, generally they either want to go to the United Kingdom and now especially go to Germany. And for a couple of reasons they want to go to Germany, first of all there is a lot of support social support and there is at least the possibility of jobs. The problem is, 80% of those people don't have the skills for the jobs. Those are very high skill population. So, the challenge would be to first state what possibilities do we have in accepting immigrants? What are the numbers that we can accept, and the ages that we can accept them at? And, for those people who are going to stay. Now a lot of those people who are there are there because of violence in the Middle East, and they would go back if things stabilized, but a great number of them do not want to. And also, it s literally a clash of cultures. A Western European, democratic values, secularist type of culture and the Middle Eastern with probably a dozen variations of Islamic culture. And there s going to be a clash. And how much can you absorb? I mean Germany took a million people last year can they take another million this year? I don't know, but there's a point where they can't keep taking a million people each year, it s not going to happen. And the like I say because I think of the difference in economic development in history. They simply don't want to share the burden. People don't want to share the them, the Hungarians, are you kidding? We can t afford them. I was actually at a thing in New York City a week and a half ago and I mean I heard the funniest thing. You know, sometimes history has an influence and this woman who lives in New York and who s Hungarian, she said, Listen. We were under Islamic, Muslim occupation for a hundred and fifty years - that ended at the end of the 17th century which is why we don t want anymore, we don t want anymore. It s interesting isn t it? I just thought that, well, that s the way it is. TR: So, kind of thinking in the fact that there are all of these different issues that need to somehow be resolved and thinking that there's a lot of possibility, but there's also a lot of limitations. What do you think this citizens role, the average European citizens, what do you think their role should be in kind of procuring this more even future for the European Union? JW: Well, again, it s different from country to country, the responsibilities of citizenry is different from country to country. And their wealth is different from country to country. And if you ve got a lot, it's easier to share than if you've got a little, and or you've had the Hungarian experience like that lady I met, and so on. So, it s a big challenge to, you know, I don't know if you can resolve these problems maybe that's the wrong word, maybe to alleviate some of these problems, and maybe even to be truthful. And, at some point in time you can say well, we can take this many people and they have to be spread around or else to say we just can't do it. We just don't have it within us to be able to engage on this type of problem. I mean I can't remember, I don't know exactly how many Syrians have been displaced it s something like ten million Syrians have been displaced through this war. There s a lot they could do, they

5 passed measures and spent three billion dollars in Turkey to help Turkey keep those people there and they ve got to do something about Greece to help the Greeks. First, last year, they beat up on the Greeks for not coming up, paying their debts, and now they re dependent on the Greeks to stop the insurgent masses coming into Europe. So, it s very hard and some countries frankly they re just not interested in doing anything as long as they don't come to our country. And, interestingly enough, it s especially true of the former communist countries like Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, and so on. So, that s one issue. Another issue that would help a lot is if their economies started to grow again. They ve been stagnant now for about not every country but for the last 10 years it s been very, very rough. Like, in this country, if there is full employment and people s wages are going up you re never going to hear anything about immigration. You start hearing about immigration as soon as the unemployment figures go up and wages become stagnant. That's when you can't have all this immigration. And the other thing that I don't see much of is you know, I see very little positive coming out of European leadership regarding this immigration. I mean it could solve a lot of their problems, and that is to have a demographic problem. As, basically, we do too in the United States, but being welcoming to immigrants alleviates that. But, you know, how are these immigrants who are coming here, what is our expectation for them? Are they the ones that are going to learn to become butchers and bakers and candlestick makers so that they can contribute to society and so on? I mean, basically that s the way it works, but I see very little of that coming out of Europe. And I think it would have to. TR: Alright, and then just one final question. So, while we're clearly talking about Europe, what sort of implications do you think that the European Union's future has for America or for the larger global community? JW: Well, for America, it s very big. We are negotiating a trade treaty with the Europeans which would be very good for us, but has run into strong opposition in Europe for a number of different reasons because I think our cultures are dividing US cultures is dividing from European culture. It s kind of an interesting thing because as the cultures divide, what Trump s everything is, is essentially trade and security. I mean, the Europeans, they don't understand why there's a climate debate in the U.S. You could not get elected to public office in most European countries maybe in England interestingly enough but even there it would be hard if you believed that there wasn t climate change going on you could not get elected. Left, right, or center. And yet half of our Congress doesn't believe that climate change is happening. Things like the gun culture of the U.S. is just anathema to the Europeans. They just don't get it. People don't get that in 2014 German police killed seven people during the whole year. Here there s a thousand a couple hundred policemen get shot here and killed here every year. And you know, whether it's healthcare, all kinds of things, the cultures are dividing. But at the same time, I keep saying trade and security seems to trump it all. Trade is enormous. The biggest trade bond is the U.S. and Europe, not the U.S. and Asia. And it would be very, very good if this treaty came to pass because I think we would eventually, the European and the U.S., would set the standards for trading for the rest of the world. But it's going to be very hard because there's a there's a lot of opposition in Europe to doing more with the U.S. Which I think is a pity, but we haven't shown a lot of leadership. You know what I mean, you can imagine how the

6 Europeans feel about somebody like the Donald. I mean, they can t understand anything like that. You know those are all parliamentary systems where somebody can t just buy themselves into becoming Prime Minister, Chancellor, or President of France. That would just never, never happen. And I think, in order to get this trade treaty, Dr. Merkel really has to put her shoulder to the wheel and get done. And I don't, I don t personally, see that happening with all the other things that are going on there. But a prosperous and a democratic rule of law in Europe is the most natural partner of the U.S. in the world. So, yeah, I mean, I think we should do everything we can to maintain very good relations in Europe. And many Europeans did the Iranian Nuclear agreement with us. They're parcel of the negotiations over the cover of Middle Eastern peace settlement and so on. So, it's still the one place where you can basically go and you don't have to be afraid of anything really bad happening to you. And, anyway, an accident can happen anywhere, but you know you're probably not going to get sick and probably not going to get mugged, you might have your purse stolen, but it s a pretty liveable region. And they have a lot to give to the world. You know, their cities are really liveable and although they re not as wealthy as the United States is, they re not are entrepreneurial as the United States is, and they re not as welcoming to immigrants as we are, boy they sure are better organized, and they do a lot for their people. Yeah, I think we should do everything we can to maintain a close relationship to Europe. TR: Alright, are there any other points that you want to bring up about the emerging future of the European Union? Just anything else that crosses your mind? JW: Well, right now, it s very pessimistic. I mean, about a week and a half ago I was talking to someone who was at Davos, the Davos Conference that always comes before the Munich Security Conference and it takes place in a village in Switzerland. It's a combination of the world's richest people really rich, mega. It s the Jeff Besos type, the Bill Gates types, and then kind of public intellectuals. You don't get there to try and solve the world's problems and as I understand it the crisis in Europe was the major point of discussion. It is a crisis, but I think they'll overcome the crisis. That's about it. But, they ve got to be honest about this immigration type thing, and so far I don t think they have been.