OY: Olya Yordanyan VG: Vesko Garcevic Garcevic Transcription OY: Welcome to the EU Futures Podcast, exploring the emerging future in Europe. I'm Olya Yordanyan, an outreach coordinator at BU s Center for the Study of Europe. Today is October 14th and my colleague Toria Rainey and I talked to Ambassador Vesko Garcevic. Ambassador Garcevic is a Professor of the Practice of Diplomacy and International Relations at the BU Pardee School of Global Studies. VG: My name is Vesko Garcevic. I'm here now Professor of the Practice of International Relations at the Pardee School of Global Studies. I have spent twenty-six years working in diplomacy as a career diplomat. I joined the diplomatic service back in the early 90s, at the time in Yugoslavia. I witnessed the breakup of my country, bloody war on its territory. I, without moving anywhere, actually a curiosity, I served several countries. It was Yugoslavia a big one, the smaller one this country called Serbia Montenegro, and Montenegro. I've been in many situations which are not regular for deployment and I served as an Ambassador of Serbia Montenegro and Montenegro. I have been posted in Brussels where I served for Montenegro in NATO, but before that I had been political director of the Minister of Foreign Affairs in my country in charge of European integration and the EU. So, among others, the EU enlargement of the EU European history, and the security structure of Europe are definitely in my focus. OY: Great. So, my first question: what kind of future is emerging now in Europe? VG: Question is difficult. We have to see this from we can pose four different questions and given answers to those questions we come, I would say, at least closer to better understanding what Europe may be in the future, or the EU maybe. First, when it comes to the EU: where are the boundaries of the EU should be? Which countries are to be included in the map in the EU? Which countries in Europe do today have a clear undisputable EU future, the EU perspective. The second is what to do with Turkey as you know, Turkey has been waiting for EU membership for decades now. Then relations between the U.S. and Russia. And finally, but maybe not as accurate as the first three ones, is the relation between the EU and US. When you put those questions on the table and you see how and you try to give answers to them then you will find out and then you will come to say something which will at least give you better understanding of the EU. Boundaries you know, for the EU, is problem that at this moment they didn't clearly define which countries in Europe have the EU perspective. The EU perspective is given to countries from Western Balkans and in the so-called systematic agenda, but when it comes to countries that belong to so-called Eastern Partnership, this is not so clear and you have here two sides stories one coming from the EU, where the EU officials will give you answers that there is no such perspective for them, the tool is there devised and ready for facilitating cooperation between the EU and those countries. On the other hand, those countries and their leaders would like to keep something like a clear perspective and would like to know when, if, and how they can become eligible to join the EU. This is very important because of the concept of deepening, which was dominant in the EU in the recent past. The EU
after the last round of enlargement the big one, not including Croatia and then Bulgaria and Romania but before then the EU decided that you need some time to digest those new countries, to absorb differences, diversities, and therefore put emphasis on deepening. And deepening was a process which was led and promoted by Germany and France particularly, and the countries aligned with them like Benelux countries or some Scandinavian members of the EU, Denmark included. But there were countries who didn't want to see this deepening as such at this very moment before knowing where boundaries are and who have a chance to become an EU member. The UK was one of them they actually, the UK, didn't want to see deepening at all because it was not high up on its foreign policy agenda, but nevertheless made the point that first let's first finish up the enlargement. Deepening was promoted particularly by France and Germany after the last round of enlargement, the big one which took place in 2006 they wanted to have Europe more powerful, better organized, and more know united. But, on the other hand, countries as I mentioned, such as the UK objected that point of view, stressing that for the EU is most important at this moment at that moment to define where boundaries are and who have perspective to become an EU Member, what to do with the Eastern Partnership, what to do with countries from the Balkans, and then have all Members in all family members in and then we can speak how we will recreate our family. So, this was from that point of view, underlying let's say maybe not so visible this dispute between two schools of thought. The as a result, among others, of that is we have Brexit and now we really are in a situation to reconsider, to revise the concept of the EU. I m not I don't come from an EU member, but my country is aspiring to become an EU member and I would say is one of few that has a clear perspective to become an EU member. So, like others are knocking on the door or waiting in the waiting room we are at this in the pipeline and so we go there. The EU we may dream what the EU should be or we can be realistic when we discuss the EU future. From the realistic point of view, I'm very prone, personally, to think that the EU which is functional and the EU that can be effective will be the EU that is designed meet different interests existing there, interests of the so-called core EU countries Germany, France, Italy, Benelux countries, and others. So, something which floating in the air for some time but is not publicly mentioned, but yes, behind closed doors. I don t know whether you credit this for her statement of the Italian Minister of Foreign Affairs recently, that the EU should reorganize to be like a two or three speed EU which means that you can have a core group, fully integrated some kind of almost Federation this can be like a European Union that Germany would like to see. Then, the second round of countries that are part of the EU but not as you know so much integrated in, they can share currency but they don't necessarily share like a budgetary policy or tax policy or have the free flow of people and goods are guaranteed for all of them but the standard, the level of integration is different. And finally, you may have the third let s say outer circle of countries still EU members that would be part of this, in part to common foreign and security policy. But when it comes to economic integration or integration in terms of standards in spheres like the rule of law or judiciary, not fully there then they can be part of this and be considered as EU members, but not fully, as I said, integrating in what the core group has as the EU. So, that may be a solution. We can only discuss this, that may be a solution. And that solution to come to the second question may include Turkey because Turkey is a problem for the EU for reform for at least one very influential group of countries within the EU. So, they have problem to integrated fully and on
the other hand there are countries that would like to see Turkey there because they consider Turkey as a bridge between Europe and the Middle East and they can see, they think that European values can be safeguarded better if they will have Turkey in rather than having Turkey out. Because Turkey can turn to something else. It's not only that we are in the market of ideas and values and you can imagine one day that they can shift to something else not necessarily be linked to the EU. So, in the concept of several, let s say, layers of this two-three speed, the EU of two-three speeds, then we can imagine that a certain level integration I can imagine Turkey being part of it. OY: How do you see that though after the coup, after what happened in July the attempted coup? VG: We are now in the process of which is like a phony war the Phony War was the war between, this was a period between 1939 and 1941 in Europe when UK and France declared war against Germany but actually nothing's happened. I really like looking like this, we have like an open book there, we have a question, we have an issue the issue which is, you know, should be addressed as soon as possible. But we see reluctance from both sides. They don't know what to do. They don't actually they are afraid of scandal and making mistakes right now. UK would like to go along that line and to leave the EU but at the same time to keep their interests alive within the EU. The EU has been a pendulum going from one to another side at one moment they were really, they behave like a frustrated partner left alone, and on the other hand they are more rational. They're trying to see this, you know, rationally to discuss, to sit at the table and discuss with the Britons what we can do together and not to iron out the damage done by Brexit. I'm not sure what's going to happen at the end of the day. I'm sure that the UK will be leaving this goes without saying but the process will last longer than we expect. I think it will take a minimum three up to five years until this process is completely accomplished. Three and five years is a long period, a relatively long period. We don't know what's going to happen within the UK. You know that Scotland would like to keep, actually, its membership within the EU they don't want to leave the EU. So, this may open up issue of another referendum and that referendum in Scotland I think I'm sure, I can bet on it will be meaningful for those advocating independence, because now they have a really strong case in their hands. And this case works in their favor. So, this is really damaging for the EU damaging for its reputation, damaging for its position in the world in the global affairs, damaging with its relation with the strategic part of the U.S., and damaging for its relation with Russia, which is assertive, powerful, right now and the culture dominating European affairs. And Europe is continuing withdrawal, not knowing what to do with Russia actually either to give certain compensation in order to strike a deal or to build muscles showing that we are really powerful. Ukraine is one of the most visible examples, but one less visible battleground is the Balkans. Because Balkans is not fully integrated there I come from this part, we've been witnessing this for years now Russia is getting more and more active there, more and more engaged. The EU cannot offer anything attractive enough actually, the EU has really strong and attractive tool, this membership. But they are reluctant to use it because of so-called enlargement fatigue. And they don't use it to attract political elites in the Balkans or like in Ukraine to turn really toward the EU and to make it more easy and more enthusiastically with
the use of what they have at their disposal which means reforms and democratization. There, those countries cannot go through democratic transition without the help of the EU and U.S. but primarily without help of the EU. And I think that the EU, because of let s say internal problems, and inward-looking approach now doesn't use properly it's powerful soft attractiveness and doesn't recognize this in order to attract and embrace countries like, as I said, like Ukraine. First of all, this will help the EU to be stronger in negotiations with Russia stronger in its posture towards China. So, the EU as a watershed and I don't know what's going to happen with the EU. I would, I only can see that if you re the EU is not reconstructed in the next few years then the EU will be you will be facing even more problems than it is facing right now because several of the red lines is there. This is how I see the EU now. OY: That s a very interesting perspective in terms of reconstructing the European Union and probably one of none of the solutions was what Italy s Minister of Foreign Affairs proposed. Or do you see any other form of solution or let s say structure that would work to remodel the European Union? VG: No, to remodel the EU? I can say what I would like to see but what I would like to see is one step but is actually now a form of victory because we work and operate in real world not in a perfect world. In a perfect world I would like to see Europe united and organized in an almost like federation of European states. This is the dream that drives all of us in Europe. This is Europe that I would like to see. Europe competent to be as equal as like a China and far east countries and to this world economically competent to be up to what people living in Europe expect the EU to be to be less bureaucratic, more efficient, and to be, let's say it is sometimes seen by citizens as over-organized or bureaucratic. And going into really something that is not necessary to have this formulated in the European laws and orders. But that Europe is a Europe of all dreams. It doesn't necessarily include UK as a full member of the EU, but the UK somehow have to stay culturally, politically, strategically linked to the EU. It includes also countries which are now outside of the EU but also somehow at least from our perspective, from us living in the EU as a part of a broader EU picture like Norway, like Iceland, even including Turkey which I personally think that Turkey must be in because without Turkey we have not this picture completely. Something which is called Euro Atlantic area Atlantic is here and the European area is there. Finally, we can I don't know what to say about Russia. Russia can be part of the story or not. This is another issue. I don t think that Russia can be part of this. Not because I think that Russia is not capable to do so, actually if they want they can do this, I think that they come from different world but even there I see maybe better space for better cooperation and better understanding between two big partners the EU and Russia. But the third question is what we can do is so-called buffer zone. Buffer zone are countries like Ukraine, Moldova vulnerable ones. Vulnerable ones exposed to influence on both sides. And how the EU can work with them, what the EU can propose, what is fair deal but a deal that will make it clear cut and will set expectations as a proper level. Not giving like a chance for ambiguity or for different interpretation the same with what we are having right now and a different help as I just explained that people as citizens from those countries really see an Eastern Partnership through different glasses than people from Brussels. You know they speak the same stuff but they see this stuff different. So, this is where Europe of my dreams and I believe that Europe at
the end of the day will come to being but let's see. Realistically, I am honestly dreams some dreams, but realistically I think first Europe needs to survive difficult times. To survive difficult times you need to do what you must do. It's not any more about dreams, about how you have to go to this and reach the point when you say other side of the river and to walk out from the river saying now finally I m there I can now remodel my model but until this point comes I think that they need to do something immediately. TR: How would you assess a citizen's participation in rebuilding this EU you would like to see? VG: Oh that's a good question. That's a good question. That question is really now omnipresent in so-called old Europe because citizens I lived in Brussels, and I traveled a lot. I've been as NATO ambassador to the Netherlands and to Belgium and to Luxembourg. And I can share with you the citizens of those countries, those core countries, countries who were founding fathers of the EU. They are frustrated that something that they consider over bureaucrat structure of the EU and they see the EU which is bureaucrats sitting in Brussels running the business for the EU. Bureaucrats working in the European Commission or European Council as being detached from reality, being detached from citizens. I can give you a simple example: at the time of financial crisis where those countries and member states were forced to introduce really unpopular measures. Cutting budgets, cutting social givings those are all countries who make themselves social welfare systems now really like socialist countries they were really forced to do some unpopular measures. Taking risks for not being voted against those government taking risks not being voting at elections for what they had to do. At the same time, at the same time those member states were receiving requests from bureaucracy in Brussels to extend their budgets for more contribution from member states into something which is called the EU Common Budget. You can imagine, they drove them crazy and you see to now the politicians sitting in Brussels, you get one day you talk to people from the European Commission and they hear one story because they would try to expand they would like to pump money into some projects here and there. And you turn to the same people sitting in Brussels but sitting in Belgian Government, or sitting in The Hague, or in Dutch Government and they have a different story and they were complaining about this. This is something which I say is the burning issue of the EU. Burning issue when I say restructuring, I don't think restructuring just like in global terms. This restructuring must start with the really small things you are doing at home in order to cut spending here and there and to do streamlining and to make your structure function better. They are really frustrated. Something which is to come back to your question something which is considered to be introduced by the EU to make EU closer to citizens of Europe is the European Parliament and the voting for EMPs in European Parliament. And finally, we have direct voting for EMPs in the European Parliament. But I would say that people didn't buy yet this completely because when the last elections took place it was 2014 turnout was really small, like less than 40 percent generally speaking, average 40 percent in the EU member states. And you can imagine that new members have better turn out than the older ones because they still believe that the EU can do something for them, but the old ones have problems with the new EU. It often takes time for each of them to accommodate.
OY: So, there are a lot of sentiments around this refugee issue. How do you see, how shall the European Union address this issue? VG: This issue is directly related to the financial crisis and crisis of the EU. The financial crisis challenged the very foundation of the EU. When one was now to come back to what you asked when one was speaking about the EU or assessing the EU s pluses and minuses maybe 10 years ago, I would say everyone would say that common foreign policy or common security policy was not the strongest point of the EU. Because countries, member states would love to have and to keep a close eye on foreign policy and security policy they didn't want to delegate this European Commission. But when it comes to finance and economy this was considered by outside world as the strongest part of the EU. But even that was put under question by financial crisis and the financial crisis actually disclose how big differences exist between different member states. Member states tend to be and have become more nationalistic, more national-oriented. Most states are interested in themselves rather than seeing the European Union as a collective body, an organism that should act and think and perform at the global scene as a collective joint body of all of them. To come back to what you said we are witnessing how right-wing parties, nationalist parties, are gaining strength in Europe everywhere. In very established democracies like Netherlands or Germany or France. Marine Le Pen she is doing so well that I'm sure that the elections they will be like a 40 percent minimum. This was a party that could hardly take 5-6 percent only a few years ago. So, something is happening and with the influx of refugees and migrants this is like a pool ring all on fire. They don t want to see the countries which have right-wing governments like Poland, Hungary, and a few others they are so much obsessed with refugees and they don t want to see them there. They would like to protect the purity of their nations, purity of their states because or in some cases they ask only to and they are ready and willing to accept refugees coming from Middle East only those who are Christians. They don't want to see because they don t want this balance, any balance, within the countries to be changed. But figures speak different. France which is considered to have most problems and is the biggest problem to solve badly of Europe and is considered to have the biggest problems with people coming from Middle East and Muslims do you know how many Muslims live in France? Seven percent. They consider seven percent of all of French citizens, French people living in France. So, in other countries it's less than 2 percent sometimes less than 1 percent. So, if you are obsessed with refugees and you re judging with figures it is like typical propaganda. But it speaks about a fear, a feeling of anxiety, feeling of discomfort in Europe these days, and this also influences the policy of the EU. Therefore, dream is one reality is one other thing. But at the end of the day, I don't want to sound pessimistic I think that this will have a happy ending that sounds more optimistic at the end, but it will take some time, it will take some time. TR: I have one last question. It sounds a little bit like the root of some of these crises whether that s the refugee crisis or economic downfalls come from this sort of ego-centric viewpoint of different EU member states. What would you say to the EU community to get them to start thinking more ecocentrically?
VG: You know, they were not so egocentric in the 90s they were living good times in 90s after the fall of the Berlin Wall. Europe was living a dream. It was a dream of unity, eternal unity, and harmony between European nations. And really, at that time if you had asked me the same kind of questions like just 15 years ago I would have given you completely different answers. You know there was a time of unity, of harmony and that there was no space for egocentrism in those days. They thought that Europe would survive united, that the model of the European Union is the model that can be applied and can be seen everywhere. But there is one more thing to be said here you know why others don't copy that model? Actually, people would like to live in Europe because it's considered to be safe, secure, fine for living, that you can enjoy a good system there, that everything is better, the social system is working well, health care insurance is working well but it is so much, as I said, bureaucratic that it s difficult to copy. Now, some say that this system was designed to serve only in good days. When we have bad days when we have good weather everything works well, when we have bad weather outside then you have to be prepared for that. But the system was not made to go to bad weather. And what's happening in Europe, you have to understand the history of Europe. History of Europe is egocentric, small, in terms of if you see from the U.S. perspective or Chinese perspective. Small state but very egocentric. So, when you add that enlargement and unification is actually accident in European history it's not the rule, it s an accident. And at least this is something working well as an exception not as a rule. And when you have a problem, like that I speak about people, when we are together and we have our team and team is working well and a problem appears, and then if we didn't build the team spirit well, then we turned to what we are we turn to ourselves, we try to find out a solution by ourselves. We don't turn to team anymore because we don't believe, we don't trust team spirit, we don't trust team this is what's going on. Actually, we didn't reach that point hopefully we will never reach this point in the EU but this is what is happening right now. Reconsidering each and everything what the EU is. Countries and there are two perspectives old countries call member states they have their perspective they would like to keep Europe as it is, they are scared of those guys from Eastern Europe because will spoil those standards. Look at them, what they do, because we have such high standards when it comes to education, when it comes to judiciary as a rule of law. But we let them come in and let them be part of us. Did we make mistake? Some would say yes, we did, and we therefore cannot afford making mistake again. Therefore, we would like to be cautious with any more. No enlargement anymore, no giving promises that we cannot deliver, no refugees anymore. Keep us we would like to be alone for a time, and for the time being and we would like to clean up our house. And how we re going to clean up our house it's difficult to answer because everyone has his or her own idea of how to clean this house. This is where the EU is now cleaning up the house. And where my country is waiting in a waiting room, to come in and to become a new member. And we are really, how to say, we are puzzled because we don't know what the rules will be. No one knows what the rules will be. For us, maybe we know because we are already in half way through. We open up accession negotiation talks and no one can't stop us anymore because you are on the track and you go there. But others, who didn't who didn't reach that point, they're still even a couple of steps behind us, and they may have problems even to make those couple of steps to become to come to the point where we are now. So, because they don't want them there, they keep them in hold. Simply, it is like the old European story new. Therefore, if we want to understand Europe of
today try to read and to understand Europe of the 19th century, late 19th century. Europe of that time and the role of Germany and the role of France and how they force their relation with Russia. How the UK treated Russia, why Russia and UK for centuries had problems and never established good relations. Why Germany has a formula for Russia Germany has a formula, Germany knows how to deal with Russia. France is somewhere between. Poland and others, the Baltic states they have their history with Russia and therefore understand them. They are so much obsessed with Russia and Russian threat because of their history with Russia. So, this is Europe. This is Europe. Many small states, many interested game, and many interests at stake, and European Union willing to accommodate all of them whether that it is capable or not. Merci. Thank you.