new

LIBERTAS
New Libertas is a publication of European Liberal Youth Issue no.9, year 2010.

Liberal economy
Too much intervention is deregulation
Igor Caldeira

Europe after the Lisbon Treaty

Vedrana Gujic

Defending the common currency

Alexander Plahr

New Libertas
IMPRESSUM
New Libertas is a publication of
European Liberal Youth - LYMEC.
The magazine issues four times per
year.
The board of editors
Alexander Plahr
Chief editor
Slaven Klobučar
Managing editor and art direction
Majda Zeherović
Editor
Vedrana Gujić
Editor
European Liberal Youth - LYMEC
Rue Montoyer 31
B-1000 Brussels
T : +32.2.237.0146
F : +32.2.231.1907
M : newlibertas@lymec.org
W : www.newlibertas.eu
W : www.lymec.eu
European Liberal Youth is support-
ive of the ALDE Group (Alliance of
Liberals and Democrats for Europe)
in the European Parliament.
LYMEC is the youth organisation
of the European Liberal and Demo-
crats Party - ELDR.
LYMEC is kindly supported by the
Youth in Action program.
Editorial
Dear friends,
the institutional struggle is finally
over, the European Union has new le-
gal foundations! Since December 1st
the Treaty of Lisbon is into effect, giv-
ing the Parliament a say in almost all
policy areas now. And a say it almost
immediately had!
In the beginning of February, Parlia-
ment vetoed the dangerous SWIFT
data sharing deal with the United
States of America, which would have
given away the privacy of 500 mil-
lion citizens. Of course the victory is
not final, we have to remain vigilant
because the Commission already is
working on a new proposal. But this
vote showed better then all theoreti-
cal explanations about the Reform
Treaty what has changed fundamen-
tally with its introduction: The EU
now is much closer to being an actual,
transparent, legitimized and working
democracy then it ever was before.
Therefore, the European Union will
no longer be “political secondary
space” but instead will become the
most important layer in the set-up of
the political system of member states.
It will be our task to fight for our
ideas and visions in this new political
set-up.
www.newlibertas.eu 02
04 10 14 16
LYMEC President Article Article Article
Aloys Rigaut European Army Liberals in Slovakia Lisbon Treaty
Issue no. 9
Liberal economy
02 Editorial 13. The raising stars of the Western Balkans
Alexander Plahr Vedrana Gujić, HNS Croatia
03. Content 14. Young Liberals involved in the emergence
of a new liberal party in Slovakia
04. An economic government for Europe, really? Richard Švihura, President of Young Liberals
Aloys Rigaut, President of LYMEC
For example, currently a proposal
16. Lisbon treaty
is prepared to regulate the Citizens’
05. Lilliputian banks not the solution Vedrana Gujic, HNS Croatia
Initiative introduced with the Lis-
Sophie in ‘t Veld & Ivo Thijssen
bon Treaty. It foresees a 2% thresh-
18. Defending the common currency
old per member state when collect-
06. Too much intervention is deregulation Alexander Plahr, Vice President of LYMEC
ing signatures for the initiative, and
Igor Caldeira
even the establishment of a proce-
20. When people miss liberalism
dure to filter the legal nature of the
08. Economic freedoms in Europe and Croatia Martina Monti and Ermanno Martignetti
initiative before allowing to collect
Marijana Milić
the signatures.
20. News from member organisations
10. Call for an European Army
Clearly, such high thresholds will
Dr. Guido Westerwelle 22. LYMEC statements
make it nearly impossible to suc-
cessfully start European Citizens’
Initiatives and therefore we should
do all we can to let the Commission
and the Spanish Presidency know
what we think of this. For we do not
SEND US
An important part of LYMEC is to facilitate the exchange of ideas and
want as few as possible Citizens’
best practices among our members. Therefore, we ask you to send us
Initiatives, but instead should en-
courage them.
YOUR your recent and best-running campaigns!
CAMPAIGNS We will present the most interesting ones in one of the upcoming
Alexander Plahr issues of New Libertas, so the rest of liberal Europe can have a look
Chief-editor of New Libertas and marvel at them.
Vice President of LYMEC
Whether a thematic campaign or an electoral one, just send us
whatever material you have in digital form (PDFs, pictures, etc.) to
P.S. We have a special goodie for
newlibertas@lymec.org with a short English explanation / translation
you in this issue: A chart that nicely
shows how the Union works after
what the campaign is about and what impact it had. Maybe you also
all the changes that occurred. Check have some pictures of the material being distributed on the streets?
it out! Just send us all the stuff you have!
issue no.9 year 2010. issue no.9. year 2010. 03

Economy
Aloys Rigaut
An economic government for Europe, really?
Article by Aloys Rigaut, President of LYMEC
‘’What would an EU “We are presenting ourselves as an economic
economic government government of 27 countries” recently said Angela
mean anyway in Merkel, after a European Council informal
practice? Since we don’t meeting aimed at discussing the Greek public
even have a European finances wreckage. A U-turn, some commentators
government, it is a
said, but in fact not really. True, the new president
somewhat difficult to
of the European Council, Herman Van Rompuy,
conceptualize…“
had called prior to that meeting for an “economic
government”. But on the other hand, he underlined
that “whether it is called coordination of policies
or economic government” does not matter, what
matters is that delivers a “common strategy
for more growth and jobs” - understand the
famous EU2020 strategy. And in the end Angela
Merkel probably did not mean anything else.
What would an EU economic government mean
anyway in practice? Since we don’t even have a
European government, it is a somewhat difficult
to conceptualize… An EU economic government
should indeed normally mean a government with
democratically elected ministers taking decisions
for the whole of the EU economy. But since there
is no such EU government and since we only have
a European Commission nominated by Member
States, we are already drifting away from that. But
anyhow, what kind of economic decisions are we
talking about?
Economic policy refers to the actions that
governments take in the economic field. Of course
one immediately thinks about fiscal policy (taxes,
social welfare, etc.), but public investments and
economic regulation are obviously also part of
economic policy, and in that latter sense, we
already have an EU economic government,
looking at Internal Market regulations or at trans-
European infrastructures (TEN) investment plans.
Yes, the real hidden agenda is therefore about a
common EU fiscal policy: constraining national
public finances through a binding framework,
coordinating national taxation and welfare
policies. The next question is obviously: do we
really need that? Some will say that we cannot
avoid it. We have a common monetary policy
and the Euro will suffer if we don’t take a closer
04 issue no.9 year 2010.
look at the credibility of national economic
policies. In other terms: if a country follows a bad
economic policy (overspending), this will affect
its public finances, which will eventually have
spillover effects for the whole Eurozone through
money market speculation and interest rates.
Fair enough, but what is the alternative? Having
the EU imposing decisions on Member States as
regards key economic decisions such as structural
reforms? We saw the results with Greece: the
FOA, a Danish trade union which represents most
of the country’s public sector workers, warned
that the European Commission’s demands for
pay-cuts could force them to recommend a no-
vote in a future referendum on euro membership.
EU citizens would simply not accept having
“Brussels” imposing decisions on them on such
issues as welfare benefits or taxation, and who
could blame them? This goes against subsidiarity.
So what is this fuss all about? “Businesses need
a stable legal and macro economic framework in
which to thrive and invest. A single market and a
single currency inevitably require some common
approaches to broader macro-economic policy
planning” recently commented ALDE leader Guy
Verhofstadt, regretting that the so-called ‘open
method of coordination’ reduces the role of the
EU “from an economic locomotive to a quasi think
tank that compares one Member State economy
with another”, just like the OECD. And here is the
dilemma: how to give more credibility to the euro
and its public finances foundations, i.e. more teeth
in the end to the Stability and Growth Pact, but
without having the EU dictating national fiscal
policy decisions and in the end being the scapegoat
for painful decisions? The path is narrow but not
impossible: more controls through regular audits
of national public finances, better surveillance of
major macroeconomic imbalances at EU level, and
the use of sweeteners such as added cohesion and
research funding for high-performing Member
States. Does that make it a European economic
government? No, just some nice little fine-tuning.
Again a big empty package, but this time we
cannot complain.
Sophie in’t Veld and Ivo Thijssen
Lilliputian
Lilliputian banks not the solution
Article by Sophie in ‘t Veld, leader D66 European Parliament Group and
Ivo Thijssen, Jonge Democraten financial economist
‘’The members of Smaller banks // It has recently been mooted that
the Economic and fifteen banks in Europe are too big to be saved by
Financial Affairs Council their national governments, but also too big too
(ECOFIN) were very fail. According to many, including Mervyn King,
pleased with the EU governor of the Bank of England, the solution is
financial supervision to create smaller banks. We believe that the size
deal. Sophie in ‘t Veld of a bank in Europe should be determined by the
and Ivo Thijssen beg to
quality it offers to consumers and shareholders,
differ.“
not by national borders.
Lilliputians and Gulliver // The European
common Market has led to a tremendous growth
in the banking sector. Conversely, its supervisory
bodies and their instruments have not been kept
in line with these European developments, and
have remained national. It is a bit like Gulliver
being constrained by the Lilliputians. As a result
of their international operations, the fifteen banks,
such as Santander (Spain), Barclays (UK) and
ING (Netherlands), have larger assets than their
national home economies. Consequently, their
national governments will not be able to bail them
out should one of these banking giants collapse.
There are two solutions: creating smaller banks or
switching from national supervision and toolkits
to a European approach. Dutch Labour Party
leader Wouter Bos, Deputy Prime Minister and
Minister of Finance, chooses the Lilliputian banks,
he believes banks should shrink to a size that is still
manageable for national governments. While this
means less risk, it would also mean diminishing
economic benefits.
A European approach // Even Eurosceptics admit
that one of the biggest advantages of European
integration is the common market. We have all
gained from the European banking giants one
way or another. Additionally, in a united Europe,
it is absurd to base the maximum size of banks by
national borders. Isn’t it strange that ING is now
too large for the Netherlands, but could simply
continue in Germany? This system leads to less
competition because a mediocre bank from a
large country like France will absorb banks from
smaller member states.
Thus, the quality of the European banking sector
is not determined by the service and profitability
which exist today, but the borders of the past.
Risky business // The current patchwork system
should be replaced by a single European regulator,
which is free to use the necessary tools, and do so
free from political interference. Risk taking is part
of any business and banks should be able to fail.
To avoid presenting the cheque to the taxpayers
every time that happens, losses should primarily
be borne by the shareholders and creditors. This
has to be accompanied by a stronger position of
shareholders across Europe.
Taboos // Moreover, the national savings
guarantees are outdated. Iceland’s experience has
shown that these are inadequate in the settlement
of cross-border insolvencies. A European
guarantee scheme must be paid for by the market
itself and the fees must be risk-based e.g. based
on the solvency level of the bank. These measures
would ensure a financial sector with more self
criticism, which is forced to build larger capital
buffers. In the event that we do need to save a
bank because its collapse threatens to spill over
to the European financial system, it will be up to
the European regulator to split the bill over the
European continent. The taboo on a European
rescue fund or mechanism needs to be lifted
urgently. There are no more national players in
a common European market, why should saving
them be a national competence?
European ambitions //Although finance ministers
all across Europe expressed their satisfaction
with the weak agreement on European financial
supervision, they will have to step up their
European ambitions to continue benefiting from
the common financial market. Lilliputian banks
are cute and safe, but provide no more than
Lilliputian prosperity. You can bank on that.
Europe is better off with a strong a competitive
financial sector and a strong system of European
supervision.
issue no.9 year 2010. 05
Intervention
Igor Caldeira
Too much intervention is deregulation
Article by Igor Caldeira
‘’There are many reasons With the new financial crisis many voices were
for State intervention, heard: it is now! This is the final proof that capi-
natural monopolies, talism is wrong, that capitalism is ill and that,
externalities, etc. In the shortly, capitalism will be dead. Marx was right!
financial market, such Such enthusiasm should be a little bit refrained.
rationales find very dif-
As the Marxist or post-marxist authors belong-
ficult grounds. So why
ing to the French théorie de la régulation know
should we ask for State
intervention?“ only too well, the success of capitalism has been
the ability to answer all of its crisis and thus sur-
vive. Something that socialism was, not surpris-
ingly, unable to do. Simultaneously, and that is
true, when there is a crisis, something must have
gone wrong.
The common answer to this is that the markets
were too deregulated. Banks could do whatever
they wanted because there is no really work-
ing supervising institutions. At the same time,
a broad catch-all coalition says that now that the
deed is done, we must fix it – meaning, the State,
meaning, taxpayers – must either nationalize
banks (Northern Rock, Fortis, etc.) or lend im-
mense sums of money that will in any case have
dramatic consequences on governmental (more
and more deficitary) budgets.
This presents two very problematic issues. One
is a quite obvious one. More expenditure, more
deficit – and of course, future generations will
have to pay for the present folly. It is the other
one I would like to approach. Both common
citizens and politicians, in times like these, need
scapegoats. They did not find strange for many
years that companies could have ever-increas-
ing results in stockmarkets independently from
long-term value creation, nor did they avoid in-
vesting in financial products with suspiciously
high return rates.
In the end, the fault belongs to “neoliberals”,
always allied with the greedy managers. Nev-
ertheless, going back to authors such as Hayek
or Friedman, I find nothing that can support
such connection between liberalism and what
Galbraith, in The New Industrial State called the
“technostructure”. As this economist tells us, the
manager is in fact, in our contemporary power
06 issue no.9 year 2010.
Where is the problem in that? Some point out the The role of a liberal, well-ordered State is laying “When a company is
holistic effects of financial institutions’ bankrupt- down general laws that harness markets and al- not good enough to
cy. But why nationalize banks? If there is debt, lows them to work for the benefit of all. stay in the market, it
convert that to equity. Banks will get immediate dies.Good managers
liquidity and the taxpayer will be spared an ad- It is not multiplying legislation and governmen- and good investors,
ditional burden. Of course, that means that a lot tal measures to avoid this or that bank from going without the ever-
present taxpayer prize
of market players (unwary investors, incautious into bankruptcy. If we keep following this suicidal
for incompetence, will
managers) may suffer severe losses. That is good. path, by the next financial crisis we will still be win, the others will
That is how markets regulate themselves. Those paying the debts of the present one. loose. “
are its checks and balances.
In our present conditions, we don’t need State reg-
ulation. What we miss dearly is market regulation;
and yes, markets are too deregulated, but not by
the absence of rules, but by its excess.
arrangement within companies, one of the capi-
talist’s worse enemies. I will not develop Gal-
braith’s argument, but I would like to discuss
a problem that Hayek considered vital: “the
apathy and lack of influence of the stockholder
is largely the result of an in stitutional set-up
which we have come to regard as the obvious
or only possible one” (part IV of the article “The
Corporation in a Democratic Society”).
Instead of blaming the market for financial cri-
sis, what people should be thinking is if the mar-
ket is really working. Can a market work if no
consequences follow a misdeed? Can anything,
for that matter, work? What interventionists are
saying is that companies, managers and inves-
tors have been acting in a socially irresponsible
way. And so, we must pay for their actions. I
find this quite surprising. Does throwing mon-
ey into a fire put it away, or fuel it? In the end,
blaming liberalism for such a spiral of economic
irresponsibility and public debt is even more
surprising. After all, liberalism stands, on eco-
nomical grounds, first of all for a well function-
ing market.
There are many reasons for State intervention,
natural monopolies, externalities, etc. In the fi-
nancial market, such rationales find very diffi-
cult grounds. So why should we ask for State
intervention? We are not facing a market-absent
environment. We have multiple players; compe- In some European countries there are no liberal youth organisations that could provide
tition can in fact be rather violent in it (good for young liberally minded people the access to LYMEC. Also, some European idealists also
the consumer!). Instead of thinking what more
can the State do to regulate financial markets, would like to work directly on the level of European politics even if they are already
we should be asking ourselves if State interven- members of their national liberal youth organisations. To those people the Individual
tion is not deregulating markets. Surprisingly
it may seem for some statist minds, markets do Members’ Section (IMS) is a great opportunity to get direct access to LYMEC and its events.
have rules.
When a company is not good enough to stay in Individual members, together with the Member organizations form the backbone of liberal
the market, it dies.Good managers and good in-
vestors, without the ever-present taxpayer prize
youth politics in Europe. They elect their delegates to the congress via an online election
for incompetence, will win, the others will loose. in advance to the congress. All individual members that have paid their membership fee
After making errors, people tend to learn and so
to improve their future performance. They will can vote at this election of the IMS-delegates to the LYMEC congress. The amount of IMS-
certainly be more cautious. delegates depends on the membership figures of the IMS.
Europe & Croatia
Marijana Milić
Economic freedoms in Europe and Croatia cratic party), not only has Croatia signed the im-
Article by Marijana Milić
‘’The fact that only 4% of Economic liberalism is the economic philosophy
countries are economi- that promotes laissez-faire capitalism, free mar-
cally free is tragic for ket, maximum of free trade and competition; it
the 21st century society contrasts mercantilism, Keynesianism and so-
and for the society we cialism. Economic liberalism gives freedom and
want to create and live
rights to each country to develop according to
in. Nevertheless some
laws of supply and demand.
changes are needed. “
Today very few countries can say; yes we live
our economic freedom. By comparing concrete
economic data, it is possible to rank countries by
index of economic freedom which considers 10
components:
1) Freedom of work,
2) Corruption,
3) Ownership rights
4) Financial freedom
5) Investment freedom
6) Monetary freedom
7) Fiscal freedom
8) Size of a state and government spending
9) Freedom of trade
10) Business freedom.
Each of these components forms an economic
freedom index, which then ranks countries into
categories. According to distribution, from 183
countries only 4% of them are “economically
free”, 30% “ mostly free”, 13% “slightly free”,
37% “mostly un free”, 16%” un free”.
The fact that only 4% of countries are economi-
cally free is tragic for the 21st century society
and for the society we want to create and live in.
Nevertheless some changes are needed. Firstly
changes to the minds of the people, then to the
minds of our leaders and politicians.
There are undeniable connections between
economic freedom and positive social and eco-
nomic values that are crucial for small people:
Income per capita, economic growth rates, hu-
man capital development, democracy, elimina-
tion of poverty and the environment protection.
This may seem as just some economical facts
and data, but it influences our every day life, life
of our families and the future of our children.
08 issue no.9 year 2010.
This clearly shows that economically free coun-
tries grow faster, exit crises faster and most
importantly the fact that progress is their only
option. It is visible and undeniable that these
countries have higher levels of BDP per capita,
higher environmental performance index and
human development index. This means that in
those countries awareness and consciousness
about countries’ economies, environment and
social questions is on a higher level, and that
those people believe in their countries and their
bright future, correlated with expected higher
life standards.
If we take Europe into consideration, we would
find ourselves in a sea of unsolved problems and
issues, which need to be discussed. There is an
aspiration for economic freedom of its citizens,
through free trade of goods, capital and human
mobility. Since the mere beginning of society,
there is an unstoppable process of human mo-
bility that is constantly changing the picture of
Europe and the rest of the world.
The main obstacle to labor mobility within Eu-
rope is the existence of borders. Differences in
languages and culture discourage human mo-
bility among European countries. (Compared to
regions within the USA where regional mobility
and regional unemployment rates are minimal.)
Within European countries mobility is limited
partially because of state regulations. For ex-
ample in some countries workers must have
a registered place of residence before they can
receive unemployment benefits, which makes it
difficult for workers to search for jobs in regions
distant from their current residence.
The economic models of euro zone also put into
focus the differences within Europe, although
due to the remarkable performance of inter
trade shows, countries of northern Europe are
richer in capital and more qualified workers
then the countries of the south. It still is not clear
whether the unique European market can make
these differences disappear and equally distrib-
ute capital and work across Europe, supporting
regional specialization.
The potential of Croatia being a possible South crimes, which have increased intensively during “Prime Minister dr. Ivo
Eastern tiger, and joining the European Union the postwar years most notably during the priva- Sanader and his failure
is huge, even though it economically ranks as a tization of former state property. Of which severe to return to govern-
“mostly un free” country. Measures are being consequences we feel today. The past, which has ment and rule from
taken to eliminate unresolved causes for this low restricted the country from moving forward, has the shadow, Croatia
ranking such as freedom of work, corruption and now been transformed into a battle for a better is again on track to
fighting corruption and
the protection of ownership rights. Today in Cro- future for Croatia and its citizens. I sincerely be-
dominance of a few
atia, we are facing tough days. Since the resigna- lieve that in today’s Europe there is no place for powerful individuals. “
tion of Croatia’s former prejudice and hypocrisy of accepting differences,
because our differences are our resource for the
Prime Minister dr. Ivo Sanader and his failure to distribution of equality among the present and fu-
return to government and rule from the shadow, ture members of the European Union.
Croatia is again on track to fighting corruption
and dominance of a few powerful individuals. Tendencies of liberal economy should encourage
Which today is one of the main political goals people to be more receptive to change. We must
of the president of Croatian Social Liberal Party, overcome barriers such as language and culture to
Darinko Kosor. With new Prime Minister Jadran- make Europe a competitive market as well as an
ka Kosor and her colleagues Darinko Kosor and enjoyable place to live for all citizens. It is possible
Zoran Milanović (the president of Social demo- to make the American dream diminish opposing
the new European dream. It is reasonable to ac-
portant Stockholm Agreement with Slovenian cept that every process takes time; does that mean
prime minister Borut Pahor opening a new chap- a whole new generation of open-minded people?
ter of international cooperation, but also has start- Or are we that generation? Is that time and future
ed prosecuting those individuals who have taken now, at this very moment?
part in illegal activity by participating in economic
Croatian economy
Service based economy with strong tourism sector
The Economy of Croatia is a service-based economy, with the service sector accounting for 67% of the total GDP. The prelimi-
nary GDP data for 2008 put Croatian GDP at 370.5 billion Croatian Kuna, or just over USD 15,700 per capita, putting Croatia
ahead of the EU member states Bulgaria, Romania, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland. The estimated Gross Domestic Product per
capita in purchasing power parity in 2008 was around USD 18,740 or 63% of the EU average for the same year.Shipbuilding
dominates the industrial sector; with exports of over €1 billion annually, shipbuilding accounts for over 10% of exported goods.
Food processing and chemical industry take significant portions of industrial output and are responsible for significant portion
of exported goods. Industrial Sector represents 27% of Croatia’s total economic output, and agriculture represents 6%.
Croatian agricultural sector subsists from exports of blue water fish, which in recent years experienced a tremendous surge in
demand, mainly from Japan and South Korea. Croatia is a notable producer of organic foods and much of it is exported to the
EU. Croatian wines, olive oils and lavender are in particularly high demand.
Tourism is a notable source of income, particularly during the summer months but also more recently from winter months,
due to an increase in popularity of snow sports such as skiing. With over 10 million foreign tourists annually, tourism gener-
ates revenue in excess of €7 billion. Croatia is ranked amongst the top 20 most popular tourist destinations in the world, and
was voted the world’s top tourism destination of 2005 by Lonely Planet. Trade has finally begun to play major role in Croatian
economic output. In 2007 Croatia exported goods in value of USD 12.84 billion (24.7 billion including service exports). Croatia
has stable functioning market economy with the strong and stable currency, the Kuna.
issue no.9 year 2010. 09

European Army
Dr. Guido Westerwelle
‘’Wherever problems
become more global,
responsibility also has to
be spread more globally.
This is the only way to
prevent the intercon-
nectedness which has
evolved due to globaliza-
tion from becoming a
threat to our security. “
10 issue no.9 year 2010.
Call for an European Army from the catastrophe brought on us by national-
Article by Dr. Guido Westerwelle, German Foreign Minister
The world in which we formulate our policies is
marked by globalization. Globalization is a fact.
It is not something we can ignore or opt out of.
We still tend to focus on the economic aspects of
this globalization. That’s half the truth at best.
Values and knowledge are globalizing. Insights
and views. Lifestyles are globalizing, and cer-
tainly not always to our own liking. For often
enough, this process also entails cultural losses.
The balance in international politics is shifting.
That has happened time and again in history.
However, it has never happened before at such
speed.
Globalization is thus also altering the frame-
work for our national and international security.
Many people in this country are perhaps not
quite sure where to find Afghanistan or Yemen
on a map. However, developments there have a
direct impact on us. Responsible foreign policy
must address these conflicts.
Wherever problems become more global, re-
sponsibility also has to be spread more globally.
This is the only way to prevent the intercon-
nectedness which has evolved due to globaliza-
tion from becoming a threat to our security. We
therefore have to find common answers to the
risks created by the proliferation of weapons of
mass destruction, to radical, fundamental ideol-
ogies, to terrorism, fanaticism and failing states.
Globalization makes these problems both more
visible and more difficult to comprehend. A
clear compass as well as jointly agreed and bind-
ing rules are therefore more necessary than ever
for a far sighted foreign and security policy. I’d
like to comment on three aspects of Germany’s
compass.
Foreign policy based on values
This is evident from the institutional foundation
of Germany’s foreign and security policy. The
European Union and the North Atlantic Alli-
ance have provided such a reliable foundation
for German policy for decades because they are
more than clubs whose members have similar
interests. First and foremost, the EU and NATO
are alliances based on values.
The transatlantic friendship and partnership
are part of the firm ground on which we stand.
We have created an area of shared fundamental
values across the Atlantic. What unites us is the
special importance we attach to the freedom of
the individual.
Germany’s commitment to the universality of
human rights is part of this. However, this is not
a policy of moral admonition. The principle of
the inviolability of human dignity enshrined in
our Basic Law is proof that we’ve learned the
lessons of our own history. Protecting human
dignity is the duty of all state authority. Persist-
ing in our efforts to promote it and championing
it all over the world is and will remain an obli-
gation of Germany’s foreign policy.
I consider the development of new partnerships
based on our solid foundation of values to be
the key to a successful foreign and security pol-
icy in the age of globalization.
I’m delighted that my colleague Yang Jiechi
came to Munich yesterday, thus becoming the
first ever Chinese Foreign Minister to attend this
Conference. And I’m also pleased to have my
colleague Sergey Lavrov next to me today. The
strategic partnership with Russia is not only one
of the keys to European security but also vital
for resolving global problems. We want this
partnership and we want to develop it further
in those areas where we have common interests.
This includes a substantive discussion on the
proposals on European security put forward by
President Medvedev.
With other emerging powers such as Brazil, In-
dia or South Africa, we are linked by common
interests and challenges, from which we have to
forge stable partnerships. In London last week,
we reached agreement with the Gulf States on
common strategies to stabilize Yemen. The new
approach in the international community’s en-
gagement in Afghanistan was decided among
more than 70 delegations.
Germany is participating in the stabilization of
Afghanistan and many other peace missions on
the basis of a UN mandate. The UN can only be
as strong as its member states allow it to be. For
us, however, it provides an essential, overarching
framework for international security. Germany re-
mains just as committed to the ideals of the UN as
it does to providing concrete support in mastering
the challenges named by the Secretary-General.
EU needs a common army to become
a global player
European integration was the lesson we learned
ism, from the self-destruction of our continent
which Germany caused. We helped to shape this
cooperation model, and it has shaped us. How-
ever, its success is not a given. When it comes to
Europe, many talk about the cost. We should talk
more about what it is worth to us. United Europe
will only be secure if my generation, which has
never experienced war, suffering or hunger, is
strongly committed to European integration. And
my generation has a chance to extend this cooper-
ation model far beyond Western Europe, perhaps
even to the whole of the European continent.
The Lisbon Treaty opened a new chapter. The Eu-
ropean Union has become more democratic and
parliamentary. Lisbon is not the end but, rather,
the beginning.
For instance, the Treaty outlines a common secu-
rity and defence policy. The German Government
wants to advance along this path. The long-term
goal is the establishment of a European army
under full parliamentary control. The European
Union must live up to its political role as a global
player. It must be able to manage crises indepen-
dently. It must be able to respond quickly, flexibly
and to take a united stand.
To achieve this, however, it must also be able to “The Lisbon Treaty
pool resources, set priorities and distribute re- opened a new chapter.
sponsibility – even in times of ever scarcer means. The European Union
has become more
The “permanent structured cooperation” instru- democratic and parlia-
mentary. Lisbon is not
ment envisaged in the Lisbon Treaty provides the
the end but, rather, the
option of moving ahead together with individual
beginning.. “
EU member states in order to further develop Eu-
rope’s vision. The EU Common Security and De-
fence Policy project will act as a motor for greater
European integration. We want strong European
crisis management. This is not intended to replace
other security structures. More Europe is not a
strategy directed against anyone. No one has any
reason to fear Europe, but everyone should be
able to depend on Europe.The Common Security
and Defence Policy is Europe’s answer to global-
ization. It is our contribution to the Euro-Atlantic
security partnership.
NATO, too, is searching for new answers to glo-
balization. We support its work on a new Strate-
gic Concept that views security within a compre-
hensive political context. This will also bolster the
Euro-Atlantic security partnership.
Peace policy
Today the uncontrolled proliferation of nuclear
weapons is probably the most serious threat to our
security. The signing of the nuclear Non-Prolifera-
tion Treaty in the 1960s was an act that aimed
at more than just codifying the status quo. Today
it still contains a reciprocal promise: the commit-
ment to non-proliferation, matched by the nuclear
powers’ commitment to disarmament. One com-
mitment aims to prevent the proliferation of the
capability to produce nuclear weapons, the other
aims to reduce existing arsenals of these weapons.
That is why the controversy over the Iranian
nuclear programme is not just a regional matter,
but rather an issue with global repercussions.
Iran has a treaty-based right to the peaceful use of
nuclear energy. The E3+3 group has even offered
Iran extensive support in this field if, in return, it
issue no.9 year 2010. 11
 ‘’The last remaining provides proof of the exclusively peaceful na-
nuclear weapons in ture of its nuclear programme. Our hand re-
Germany are a relic of mains outstretched, but it has not been taken up
the Cold War. They no so far. If there is to a new cooperative approach,
longer serve a military Iran has to follow up its words with concrete
purpose. That is why,
actions. An agreement with the International
through talks with our
Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna on the issue
partners and allies, we,
the German Government, of the Tehran Research Reactor would be a con-
fidence building step.
are working to create
the conditions for their
removal. “ It would not be a substitute, however, for ne-
gotiations to ensure the civilian character of
the Iranian nuclear program. A nuclear armed
Iran is unacceptable for us. Such a development
could lead to the destabilization of the entire re-
gion and to a potentially fatal impairment of the
non-proliferation regime.
The other side of the coin is reducing existing
arsenals of nuclear weapons. We therefore sup-
port the current US-Russian negotiations on
strategic arms reduction. Success on this issue
will also have a positive effect on the upcoming
review of the Non-Proliferation Treaty in May.
Disarmament is not an unrealistic dream; in
the context of globalization it is a necessity. Just
a few days ago, we had a discussion in Berlin
with Hans-Dietrich Genscher, Helmut Schmidt,
Richard von Weizsäcker – unfortunately Egon
Bahr was not able to attend due to illness – and
their American counterparts Henry Kissinger,
Sam Nunn, William Perry and George Shultz on
how, as a next step, not only the number, but
also the military importance of nuclear weapons
could be reduced. With this, we hope to open
the window of opportunity even wider.
At the political level, we also aim to achieve a
“peace dividend” for Germany in the context
of such a strategy. The last remaining nuclear
weapons in Germany are a relic of the Cold War.
They no longer serve a military purpose. That is
why, through talks with our partners and allies,
we, the German Government, are working to
create the conditions for their removal. As part
of this process, we also want to discuss confi-
dence building measures with Russia as well as
a reduction of its weapons.
12 issue no.9 year 2010.
We must take care, however, to ensure that
nuclear disarmament does not re-open the pos-
sibility of conventional wars.
Anyone who is serious about a world free of
Balkan stars
nuclear weapons, about “global zero”, must
also take conventional arms control and dis-
armament into account. We will actively work
to prevent an erosion of the Treaty on conven-
tional armed forces in Europe (CFE Treaty). For
nuclear and conventional disarmament must go
hand in hand.
Vision for the future
Many people may regard the vision of a world
without nuclear weapons as naïve. But it is in-
sistence on the status quo and overlooking the
new risks that it produces that is irresponsible
– not disarmament. Of course disarmament will
not happen overnight, but why shouldn’t it be
possible?
I was born in 1961. At that time, the Wall was
being built right through the centre of Berlin
and Germany. Some people had long given up
all hope of reunification.
And yet before I turned 30, the determination of
millions of people to achieve freedom brought
the Wall tumbling down. Visions are not policy,
but it is impossible to shape policy without vi-
sion.
We find ourselves at the start of a new decade.
The German Government will do all it can to en-
sure that it becomes a decade of disarmament.
Shortened speech by Federal Minister Dr. Guido
Westerwelle at the 46th Munich Conference on Se-
curity Policy 06.02.2010. Courtesy of Auswärtiges
Amt – Federal Foreign Office of Germany. Title and
subtitles by the editors.
Vedrana Gujić
The rising stars of the Western Balkans
Article by Vedrana Gujić, HNS Croatia
‘’The membership Looking back on what we’ve done in 2009,
applications of there is nothing much to be proud at. It was the
Montenegro, Albania peak of economic crisis, recession and political
and Serbia, taking turmoil. The EU was in a period of transition
place in a politically from one mandate of the European parliament
sensible year for the EU, and Commission to another, from one Treaty
proved there is still high to a new Lisbon Treaty, finally in force. While
attractiveness of the we were busy saving our economies and nego-
integration concept and
tiating the names of our future leaders, almost
highly expected positive
unnoticed alterations happened in our neigh-
effects of the integration
on the new applicants.” bourhood. Just a glance at current enlargement
map shows that the Western Balkans made a
shy, but important step towards EU. In the very
same year of 2009, the majority of the countries
of the Western Balkans filed applications for the
EU membership. Montenegro was the first one,
applying in December 2008. It was followed by
Albanian application in April 2009, while Serbia
did the same at the end of the Swedish presi-
dency in late December. Three important appli-
cations immediately changed the colour of the
“black hole” of Europe. With Croatia and Mace-
donia already holding the status of candidate
countries and Montenegro, Albania and Serbia
as applicants, the future of the Western Balkans
looks much brighter.
The membership applications of Montenegro,
Albania and Serbia, taking place in a politically
sensible year for the EU, proved there is still
high attractiveness of the integration concept
and highly expected positive effects of the inte-
gration on the new applicants. Montenegro ap-
plied for EU membership in December 2008 and
the Commission is currently preparing an Opin-
ion as requested by the Council. Albania filed
an application in April, but the Commission’s
Opinion will be drafted following the stabilisa-
tion of political situation in the country. Main
challenges ahead of both countries are con-
solidation of the rule of law, stabilisation of the
state institutions (especially judiciary) and fight
against corruption. Serbia has clearly demon-
strated its intention to move closer to the EU by
applying for its membership in December 2009.
Even though the Stabilisation and Association
agreement has not yet been ratified, due to
Dutch veto bound by Serbian inability to arrest
refugee general Mladić, Serbian self-determi-
nation to take a path in a direction of a full EU
membership should be preserved as a positive
signal. Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo,
even though the furthest from the full member-
ship, also enjoy the European perspective. Bos-
nia and Herzegovina urgently needs to speed
up key reforms and determine its constitutional
settlement to meet the conditions for applicant
status, whilst Kosovo is still challenged by po-
litical and security instabilities and lack of rec-
ognition of its status by several member states.
While Croatian accession negotiations are final-
ly entering its final phase, enabled by the finali-
sation of bilateral agreement with neighbouring
Slovenia on the handling of the border issue, we
can soon expect the opening of Macedonian ac-
cession negotiation, due to recent positive rec-
ommendation by the Commission to start the
negotiation talks with Skopje. However, the
name dispute is still a big diplomatic obstacle
in front of Macedonian EU and NATO member-
ship. Following the membership applications of
the Western Balkan’s countries, the EU recipro-
cally decided to open its doors for their citizens
from 1.1.2010. The barriers for Macedonia, Mon-
tenegro and Serbia are lifted from the beginning
of 2010, while the Commission will table pro-
posals for Albania and Bosnia and Herzegovina
by mid-2010, provided these countries meet the
necessary conditions. Visa liberalisation for the
Western Balkans is a major step forward for the
region and an additional encouragement for
the countries to intensify their efforts to reach
the EU criteria. Latest positive developments in
the Western Balkans are a success story for both
the EU and the region. The applying countries
formed a group for the next big South-eastern
enlargement and have clearly set their reform
paths towards meeting the European standards.
On the other side, the EU revived its attractive-
ness and enforced its role of a drive of a change
and progress in its neighbourhood. The EU is
still the universe our Balkan stars are striving at.
issue no.9 year 2010. 13
Slovakian liberals
respond to the events in our society and politics.
We will together with the non-profit sector seek to
hamper the efforts to develop our country back to
socialism. We will do all our efforts, so that envy
and fear will not win, but freedom and responsi-
bility overcomes them. We want our country to
stay free and for our generations unencumbered.
Richard Švihura
At this year’s congress of our organisation a gen- ‘’Slovakia has finally
erational exchange in the presidency will occur obtained a serious liberal
and some of us will give place to our most active party. It is supported
members. F.A. Hayek Foundation will prepare by the liberal think-tank
next year Summer School of Economics and with and has its own youth
their projects they will contribute to the improv- organisation as well – the
ment of economic education in Slovakia. Young Liberals. “

We will encourage especially the young people

to attend the elections and stop these negative Some of us will take part at the „Intellectual Entre-
trends. preneurs“, prepared by the F.A. Hayek Founda-
tion and the Atlac Economic Research Foundation.
Slovakia has finally obtained a serious liberal par-
ty. It is supported by the liberal think-tank and has
its own youth organisation as well – the Young
Liberals. Our greatest wish is our partner party
SaS to become a parliamentary party and part of
the ELDR group. Public opinion suggests it will

Young Liberals involved in the emergence of a be so.

new liberal party in Slovakia

Article by Richard Švihura, President of Young Liberals

‘’Over the years we have
organised a series of ac-
tivities and commented
on social and political
developments in Slova-
kia. Last year we and our
foreign colleagues have
organised an interna-
tional workshop on Civil
liberties. “
The main objective of Young Liberals is together
with its partners to be strongly involved in cre-
ating liberal thinking and a long liberal tradition
in Slovakia. Young Liberals were born in spring
2002, that time as the Liberal Youth of Slovakia.
In 2006 we transformed into its current form of
organisation with more than 200 member net-
work of young liberals in all regions. In par-
ticular we cooperate with the German Friedrich
Naumann Foundation and Slovak think-tank F.
A. Hayek Foundation and Liberal Society Foun-
dation, as well as with right-wing youth organi-
sations.
In Slovakia we founded Liberal clubs, informal
discussion groups for the dissemination of liber-
al ideas in various regions. After the recent left-
ist and populistic government got to power, we
became the largest youth advocates of pension
saving (e.g. „Save the pensions“ initiative, „2nd
pillar Youth Forum“ with José Piñera).
In addition to our basic objectives it is our ambi-
tion to provide forum for young liberal-minded
people, who want to actively engage in politics
and professionaly shape themselves at specific
economic and social problems and pressing is-
sues. Thus giving the opportunity to earn ex-
perience from the high politics and municipial
policies and work in their professional growth.
Over the years we have organised a series of ac-
tivities and commented on social and political
developments in Slovakia. Last year we and our
foreign colleagues have organised an interna-
tional workshop on Civil liberties. We organised
essay competition with the topic: „Separation of
church and state separation from church law“.
Few of us attended the „Academy of right-wing
politics“, „Summer school of Economics“, „Lib-
eral weekend“, projects organised jointly with
our partner F.A. Hayek Foundation. We assisted
in organising the international seminar „Free-
dom and Civil Society“. Young Liberals became
part of the European Liberal Forum (ELF) via
LYMEC. For the past few years we were able to
strenghten our relations with the domestic and
foreign youth organisations, increase the num-
ber of our members and supporters and estab-
lish a cooperation with the new political party
Freedom and Solidarity (Sloboda a Solidarita
– SaS).
Political reality for a Liberal party in Slovakia
from a long-term perspective was ingenerous.
Until now the liberal parties survived only one
term. They have gradually vanished, as they
were rather entities created for a special pur-
pose. After a long considerations about a further
existence of liberal politics, we have decided in
the spirit of strenghtening the organised liberal-
ism in Slovakia a year and a half ago to coop-
erate closely with the reformer Richard Sulik in Slovakia
founding the political party SaS.
We knew that if a serious subject is to be found- The Slovak Republic is a landlocked country in Central Europe with a population of over five million and an area of about 49000
ed, it must be associated with an author of a flat square kilometres (19,000 sq mi). Slovakia borders the Czech Republic and Austria to the west, Poland to the north, Ukraine to
tax, which brought positive changes in Slovakia. the east and Hungary to the south. The largest city is its capital, Bratislava. The second largest city is Košice. Slovakia is a mem-
We were with him in a constant contact since ber state of the European Union, NATO, UN, OECD, WTO, UNESCO and other international organizations.
2004, when he publicly presented his proposals
on the „Contribution bonus“. Like the flat tax, The Slavs arrived in the territory of present day Slovakia in the fifth and sixth centuries AD during the Migration Period. In the
retirement savings, as well as the Slovak version course of history, various parts of today’s Slovakia belonged to Samo’s Empire (the first known political unit of Slavs), Great
of the negative tax was a concept, which we sup- Moravia, Kingdom of Hungary, the Austro-Hungarian Empire or Habsburg Empire, and Czechoslovakia. An independent Slo-
ported from the beginning. After the 2006 elec- vak state briefly existed during World War II, during which Slovakia was a dependency of the Nazi Germany 1939–1944. From
tions our goal was to be a serious platform not 1945 Slovakia once again became a part of Czechoslovakia. The present-day Slovakia became an independent state on January
only for young people, but for all liberals since 1, 1993 after the peaceful dissolution of its federation with the Czech Republic.
we thought a liberal political party did not exist
in Slovakia. Slovakia is a high-income advanced economy with one of the fastest growth rates in the EU and OECD. The country joined the
European Union in 2004 and the Eurozone on January 1, 2009. As of 2010, Slovakia together with Slovenia are the only former
We have noticed that there is a last chance in Communist nations to be part of European Union, Eurozone, Schengen Area and NATO simultaneously.The Slovak head of
the forthcoming parliamentary elections to es- state is the president (currently Ivan Gašparovič), elected by direct popular vote for a five-year term. Most executive power lies
tablish a consistant liberal party. Second chance with the head of government, the prime minister (currently Robert Fico), who is usually the leader of the winning party, but
to establish a liberal subject would be only after he/she needs to form a majority coalition in the parliament. The prime minister is appointed by the president. The remainder
a few years, when the society and the economy of the cabinet is appointed by the president on the recommendation of the prime minister.
would necessarily need responsible solutions,
after another post-election socialist devastation. Slovakia’s highest legislative body is the 150-seat unicameral National Council of the Slovak Republic (Národná rada Slovenskej
Given the current negative trends in the society, republiky). Delegates are elected for a four-year term on the basis of proportional representation. Slovakia’s highest judicial
political rudeness and cynicism, populism and body is the Constitutional Court of Slovakia (Ústavný súd), which rules on constitutional issues. The 13 members of this court
nationalism, a series of non-liberal government are appointed by the president from a slate of candidates nominated by parliament.
measures and the continuous deterioration
of business environment, we will continue to

14 issue no.9 year 2010. issue no.9 year 2010. 15

 EUROPEAN
EUROPEAN COMMISSION HIGH REPRESENTATIVE
COMMISSION 27 commissioners, appointed by the FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS
PRESIDENT
Member States with the consent of the Catherine Ashton
European Parliament
José Manuel Barroso
Promotes the general interest of the Union

Proposes directives and regulations to

both legislative bodies

Ensures the implementation of the Treaties

and common policies
EUROPEAN Executes the budget
PARLIAMENT NOTE: Newly created post of High
Legislative body of 751 MEPs elected by Representative of the Union for Foreign
universal suffrage for 5 years Affairs and Security Policy serves as one
of the Commission’s Vice-President and
Represents the citizens and approves chairs the General Affairs and External
Relations Council.
the “laws” and the European budget EUROPEAN
together with the Council of Ministers
COUNCIL COUNCIL OF
Approves of the President of the PRESIDENT
Commission and the College of
Herman
MINISTERS
Commissioners EUROPEAN Legislative body rallying the Ministers of the Member
PARLIAMENT Van Rompuy States in specialised configurations. From 1 November
2014, the Council will take decisions on the basis of
PRESIDENT a double majority (55 % of the Council, at least 15
Jerzy Buzek Members States and representing 65% of the popula-
tion of the Union)

EUROPEAN COURT
OF AUDITORS EUROPEAN
COUNCIL
Meetings of Heads of State and Government twice a year
with the President of the European Commission and with
the participation of the High Representative of the Union for
Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.

Defines of the general political directions and priorities of the

Union

NOTE: European Council is chaired by the newly created post of

EUROPEAN COURT
the President, elected for two and a half years, renewable once
OF JUSTICE

16 issue no.8 year 2009. issue no.8 year 2009. 17


Defending Euro
Alexander Plahr
‘’The Greek deficit is
projected to exceed 300
billion Euros (or more
than 27000 Euros per
Greek citizen), roughly
121 percent of gross
domestic product (GDP)
in 2010. “
18 issue no.9 year 2010.
Defending the common currency has been promised to citizens when they gave up
Article by Alexander Plahr, Vice President of LYMEC
Strikes in Greece! Unions block the entrances to
the Athens stock exchange and claim that „the
capital markets take Greece hostage“! The aus-
terity package by the government would put
markets before people!
But is this the truth? Is it the markets’ fault that
Greece has to cut its budget? What is behind
those stories?
Sadly enough, Greece in recent times never had
a history of surplus budgets. Quite to the con-
trary, Greece politicians wanted to spend much
more then the state ever collected in taxes. Every
responsible private citizen does not spend more
money then he owns. The same goes for respon-
sible politicians and the state budget.
The trouble is that –unlike most private citizens-
states can quite easily borrow money. And the
Greek state did! They did spend so much more
money every year then they collected taxes, that
they had a hard time fulfilling the rules of the
Stability and Growth Pact in order to be able to
join the Euro. We today know that back then
the Greek government did not fulfil the require-
ments at all but cheated their way in by deliber-
ately reporting wrong numbers.
And during the following years, Greece kept on
spending and spending, every year accumulat-
ing more debts. But like every private citizen
who takes up credit, it is becoming more and
more of a problem to find people who are actu-
ally willing to lend money.
That is the core of the Greek dilemma: The Hel-
lenic Republic has over-spend so much it has to
pay huge premiums to investors in order that
they even consider lending their money to a
borrower who might not be able to pay back.
The risk of Greece going bankrupt is so huge, it
becomes more and more difficult for the Greek
government to borrow as much money as they
intend.
The Greek deficit is projected to exceed 300 bil-
lion Euros (or more than 27000 Euros per Greek
citizen), roughly 121 percent of gross domestic
product (GDP) in 2010. Greece has to finance a
debt of about 53 billion Euros in 2010, of which
it only has already financed around 8 billion Eu-
ros at the end of February.
The government will have to raise approximate-
ly 45 billion Euros during the rest of the year.
However, investors will only give their money
if they see indications that there is an end to this
spiral of over-spending und unsustainable fi-
nancial irresponsibility.
Therefore, the Greek government has an-
nounced austerity measures, which are the
cause for the Unions’ protests. What those
people protesting fail to comprehend: There is
no alternative to massively cutting back on the
over-spending, selling off government property
(unlike most other European countries, Greece
has seen nearly no privatizations of state com-
panies, many of which still are de-facto monop-
olies)- bringing down labour costs and revital-
izing the economy.
In a classic example of socialist stupidity, many
of Europe’s socialists now call for “solidarity
with Greece”. If the capital markets don’t lend
any more money to Greece because it already
has way too much debts, they are evil! In that
case, why do not other states take up the mon-
ey on the capital markets and then give it to
Greece? Why not a bailout for Greece?
The answer is quite simple: Because then every
debt offender would continue going on with his
spending frenzy, free riding on the taxpayers’
money of the other Eurozone member states.
Responsible behaviour would then be discour-
aged, irresponsible behaviour encouraged!
Because in fact, Greece is not the only country
spending much, much more then it should, ac-
cumulating an unproportional and dangerously
high amount of debts. Italy, Portugal and Ireland
follow hot on its heels! Out of those four countries
highly endangered by state bankruptcy, only Ire-
land has really taken steps to better the situation.
So what signal would it send to other countries if
Greece would get a free ride? Exactly the wrong
one!
1680 Euros / second
Speed of Greek deficit growth
Luckily, the treaties establishing the Eurozone ex-
plicitly forbid the bailout of members. This rule
has to be upheld, otherwise we that risk members
who are in urgent need to do so will not reform
their budgets. Even more important: The trust in
the Euro is based on clear rules that define how
the Eurozone works. Undermining the rules en-
shrined in the treaties would mean betraying what
their national currencies. Not abiding to those
rules would undermine the trust in, and therefore,
the stability of our common currency.
Therefore, the stability of the Euro will have to
be defended in Greece, Portugal, Italy and Spain:
Governments need to withstand the pressure of
socialists, populists and trade unions and reform
their budget. Because a common currency not
only means benefits for all, but also responsibility
for all. A private citizen can not base his living on
credit in the long run, neither can countries. This
crucial reality has to be understood. Budget deficit 2010 in selected Eurozone countries
Greek economy
The economy of Greece is the twenty-seventh largest economy in the world by nominal gross domestic product (GDP) and the
thirty-third largest by purchasing power parity, according to the data given by the International Monetary Fund for the year
2008. Its GDP per capita is the twenty-seventh highest in the world, while its GDP PPP per capita is the twenty-sixth highest.
Greece is a member of the OECD, the World Trade Organization, the Black Sea Economic Cooperation, the European Union and
the Eurozone. The Greek economy is a developed economy with the public sector accounting for about 40% of GDP. The service
sector contributes 75.7% of the total GDP, industry 20.6% and agriculture 3.7%. By the end of 2009, as a result of a combination
of international (financial crisis) and local (uncontrolled spending prior to the October 2009 national elections) factors, the Greek
economy faced its most severe crisis after 1993, with the highest budget deficit (although close to those of Ireland and the UK) as
well as the second highest debt to GDP ratio in the EU. The 2009 budget deficit stood at 12.7% of GDP. This, and rising debt levels
(113% of GDP in 2009) lead to rising borrowing costs, resulting in a severe economic crisis. Greece tried to cover up the extent of
its massive budget deficit in the wake of global financial crisis.
issue no.9 year 2010. 19
 Martina Monti & Ermanno Martignetti
Liberalism
‘’When there’s no
liberalism, people
strongly feel its absence,
and even if they don’t
know the philosophical
or political theory, they
unconsciously look for
its own principles and
some of them fight for
freedom of individual.“
20 issue no.9 year 2010.
When people miss liberalism NATO had asked the Netherlands to extend its four-year-old Afghanistan mission by one year to August 2011, though in a
Article by Martina Monti and Ermanno Martignetti
Some people, when explaining the meaning of
liberalism, generally start from the idea of ‘’lib-
eral’’, from the philosophic theory and from its
main characteristics.
But what is liberalism in its practical meaning?
What happens when there’s no liberalism?
In most EU countries, people feel liberal ideas
as the basis of their own life and as the founda-
tion of everyone’s society; they often don’t real-
ize how their individuality is being respected,
mainly because they are used to freedom.
When I use the term ‘’freedom’’ I mean freedom
of information, freedom of love, freedom of re-
search, freedom of religion, respect of different
ideas, etc.
When there’s no liberalism, people strongly feel
its absence, and even if they don’t know the
philosophical or political theory, they uncon-
sciously look for its own principles and some of
them fight for freedom of individual.
In Italy, the leading party of the country claims
itself as a liberal party, the party that preserves
freedom and respect. Taking care of that, I should
deduce that is the reason why in Italy law for-
bids marriage to a couple of the same sex; that
is the reason why in Italy, when you read dif-
ferent newspapers, you read different informa-
tion about the same topic and you don’t know
what is real and what is fake (keeping in mind
that in Italy, the main newspaper headlines and
the main tv channels are owned by politicians);
that is the reason why in Italy, after the ratifi-
cation of ‘’law 40’’, when two people want to
have a baby with artificial insemination because
of personal problems of fertility, they face so
many problems that the most of couples have to
put themselves into the hands of a foreign clinic.
The real problem is that Italian politics are built
around the personality of charismatic leaders,
and it is hard to say that today political ideas
in general could interest voters, accustomed to
see themselves more as consumers than as citi-
zens. In other words people, even feeling the
lack of personal freedom, are still not interested
in political matters and do not contribute to the
necessary change in the society. This fact has
relevant consequences on the style of political
communication as well on the contents of the
communication itself, that becomes no more an
expression of values, but is just marketing and
entertainment.
Taking care of all that, what does it mean to be
liberal and to offer liberal strategies to an ill so-
ciety like the Italian one?
The history teaches us that usually liberalism is
first of all a constitutional theory about power
and ways to limit it – the famous Locke’s for-
mula of checks and balances – and about the
citizenship. That theory was incorporated in
the Italian Constitution, but it more and more
showed all the inconveniences that every con-
cretization of abstract systems presents.
That is the reason why liberalism sometimes has
to leave its theoretical level to be put into prac-
tice in an easy and immediate way to be well un-
derstood by people who are not used to political
terms. In this way, and only with people’s ef-
forts to spread the concept of personal freedom,
opening minds that were previously blurred
by television shows and fake information, the
change will be possible.
Italy is just an example, and surely is not the
only case of a society in a difficult situation, so
this ideas should be extended to each reality
that needs more freedom, more liberalism and
more tolerance.
Netherlands: Early elections on June 9 after government collapse
After the country’s coalition government collapsed mid-February due to sharp differences over extending the military mission
in Afghanistan, a snap general election has been called for June 9.
different form - a request two of the governing parties, Christian Democratic Appeal (CDA) and Christian Union (CU), had
wanted to discuss. But the third one, PvdA Labour Party, said it would not support an extension under any circumstances,
resulting in a public coalition spat as the party was accused of abusing the issue for political gain ahead of March 3 municipal
elections.
LYMEC wishes both our member organizations in the Netherlands, JOVD and JD, best of luck in supporting the liberal cause
during the upcoming election campaign!
JuLis Austria: Street action against video
surveillance
On the first weekend of February, the state branch Vienna suc-
cessfully raised the problematic issue of video surveillance in
public spaces. Some JuLis discussed with passers-by while
others “filmed” the scene with dummy CCTV cameras, thus
making people object to it and thereby starting a process of
reflection in the minds of many citizens.
LHG elects new board
On their 43rd federal congress (22nd-24th January) the
German Federal Association of Liberal Students Groups
(LHG) elected their new board. As in the previous year,
Johannes Knewitz (27) will lead the liberal as well as sec-
ond biggest -in absolute numbers- student organization
of Germany. Sonja Worch was confirmed as treasurer.
Further board members are Kristina Kämpfer, Benjamin
Blumenthal and Berthold Haustein.
They will be supported by cooptations Sahba Afradi
and Kai Kreisköther. The new board has expressed that
it wants to focus on developing and support the local
university structures of the LHG and to strenghten their
position in the public debate about the vehemently dis-
cussed process of Bologna. For their congress in Göttin-
gen, LHG could welcome over 80 students from almost
40 universities.
LYMEC STATEMENTS
Today’s State debts
On 11th February the European Parliament voted 378-196 to reject the SWIFT bank data sharing deal with the
United States. Members of European Parliament resisted pressure from the US to continue a nine-month in-
terim agreement allowing the United States of America access to financial transaction data from SWIFT, an
international banking transfer system.
Aloys Rigaut, President of the European Liberal Youth (LYMEC) reacted to the news of the vote: “The European
European Parliament SWIFT
Parliament for the first time exercised its new powers under the Treaty of Lisbon, rejecting this scandalous
agreement which would have given away the privacy of the very citizens they represent.
We applaud the Parliamentarians who across party line opposed this dubious proposal. We are especially
proud of the role liberals played in shaping this broad majority, not least based on the critical report of liberal
rapporteur Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert.”
LYMEC Vice President Alexander Plahr added: “This is a great development! For the next months, European
banking data will be secure again. However, we must remain vigilant, since a permanent agreement will be
proposed by the Commission later this year.
It is highly doubtful that such a deal is necessary, since there already today is excellent judicial cooperation
between the EU and the US. Any future agreements in the area of law enforcement must therefore continue to
be based on the presumption of innocence, reciprocity, strict data protection and recourse to the courts.”
In the beginning of February the new European Commission
was confirmed by the European Parliament. Mr Barroso and his
26-member cabinet received 488 yes votes, 137 against and 72
abstentions.
Reacting to the news, Aloys Rigaut, President of the European
Liberal Youth LYMEC stated: “We are happy that now finally the
time of standstill is over - the Treaty of Lisbon is in force and
the European Commission is complete. We liberals now expect
from the College of Commissioners to immediately start tack-
ling the Union’s challenges. It has been several months of in-
stitutional wrangle and it is now high time to get back to work:
too many dossiers are on hold, citizens expect actions after
New European Commission
last year’s EP elections.”
LYMEC Vice President Alexander Plahr adds: ‘The composition
of the Commission is a good one for liberals! With eight Com-
missioners we have nearly a third of the Commission coming
from our camp – as many as never before. In the future liberals
will determine the course of the Union in such important areas
as economy, currency, research and home affairs.
Furthermore, MEPs voted on the so-called interinstitutional
agreement, which for the first time opens the door for a true
right of initiative of Parliament, something liberals and have
been demanding for decades. This means more democracy for
all of us!’
The European Liberal Youth (LYMEC) expresses deep worries about the drastically rising State debt in Eurozone
Member States. In Greece, this year’s deficit will soar to 12.7 percent of GDP, more than twice the previous
government’s projection. Thirteen out of the sixteen Eurozone members currently violate the budget discipline
criteria, accumulating ever more debts. Some Member States are even said to be drifting in the direction of
State bankruptcy.
LYMEC President Aloys Rigaut stated: ‘The Stability and Growth Pact’s rules of a maximum deficit of 3% of GDP
and a national debt below 60% GDP are there for a good reason. This discipline is necessary for the stability of
the Euro, for low interest rates, for the credibility of our economic policy, and the free-riding of certain Member
States is in this respect totally irresponsible.
Who will pay for this spending frenzy? Yes us, the young generation. Demographic ageing is already a sufficient
burden; let’s not add a new one to that. Today’s debts are tomorrow’s taxes.’
Vice President Alexander Plahr added: ‘We welcome that finance ministers at the last ECOFIN meeting outlined a
timetable for budget cuts. However, we call on Member States to be more ambitious! Every additional Euro debt
over the three percent maximum is hurting the credibility of our common currency.
And every single cent is a heavy burden on coming generations, which will have to repay all that debts by their
taxes. We therefore call for more intergenerational fairness and more seriousness when dealing with the stabil-
ity of our currency. This rising State debt is a time bomb that needs to be defused fast. Politicians will finally
have to learn to say no to calls for subsidies or company rescue packages in order to consolidate their budgets.’
Recently, the European Liberal, Democrat and Reform Party (ELDR) assembled in Barcelona to hold its 30th Con-
gress. The European Liberal Youth (LYMEC) attended the Congress with ten delegates as well as having many
active LYMEC members in the other party delegations active in Barcelona. Congress reelected Annemie Neyts
LYMEC the programmatic force of ELDR
(OpenVLD) as President of the ELDR Party for her third mandate. David Griffiths (LibDems) has been re-elected
as Treasurer for the second time. The Congress also elected 4 Vice Presidents: Markus Löning (FDP), Lousewies
Van Der Laan (D66), Marc Guerrero (CDC) and Leoluca Orlando (IdV).
LYMEC President Aloys Rigaut commented: “We would like to congratulate very warmly all those elected and
wish them every success. With the entry into force of the Lisbon treaty, democratic control and strong European
parties are now more needed than ever. The main challenge for the ELDR will be to continue transforming itself
from an European umbrella organization into a true political party, directed towards gaining influence on the
decision-making in order to implement its policies.” Besides the Bureau elections, it was the programmatic
debate that dominated the Congress in Barcelona. LYMEC proved to be a strong force for political debate within
ELDR while discussing the theme resolution “Liberal Answers For A New Prosperity”.
LYMEC Vice President and delegation leader Alexander Plahr commented: “We managed to improve the theme
resolution further, making it an excellent document dealing with liberal economy. We can also be extremely
proud that we managed to convince ELDR delegates of LYMEC policies in many other areas: ELDR now officially
opposes automatic transfer of SWIFT banking data to the United States of America, is in favour of genetically
modified crops and calls for a stronger commitment towards European Citizenship. LYMEC has proved that it is
the programmatic force of ELDR. We now look forward to our mother party implementing those policies in their
statements and events.”