Wolfgang SCHUSSEL: The EU has to be looking forward to contributing to the good development of Ukraine even if not everything is perfect there
The former Austrian chancellor Wolfgang Shussel arrived to Potsdam to attend the M100 Honorary Award ceremony held in honor of Lord George Weidenfeld just after the M100 Sanssouci Colloquium-2011 called “Global Democracy –
A Triumph of Social Networks?” Schussel was quite emotional when delivering a speech about the 92-year-old co-chairman of the M100 Sanssouci Colloquium deliberative body who was among the initiators of this international journalists’ forum. After the ceremony Schussel agreed to give the exclusive interview to The Day. The former chancellor belongs to the euroskeptics who do not support the Ukrainian membership in the EU. That is why it would be interesting to know the arguments of this Austrian politician and assess how cogent they are.
I think you have noticed a lot of articles about the death or decline of Europe being published after the crisis in the European zone, sovereign debts of some countries and the unrest in London. What do you think is wrong with Europe?
“You know, this question is difficult to answer because I do not think that Europe is in a crisis or the euro is in a crisis. I think some countries are overdebted and did not act in the right way. It is not only Greece; there are a lot of such countries. Secondly, there is a crisis of mentality and the idea is that we can cheat ourselves. I think the Treaty of Maastricht was right. The introduction of the euro was a good thing. The criteria of not having more than three percent GDP deficit budget per year and the national debt ceiling of 60 percent was correct, too. With some flexibility during an economic crisis it would be absolutely OK. But what was unacceptable, it was the way that several countries, not only Greece but also big countries like France and Germany broke the rules in 2004. This was not correct because Greece cheated and Italy spends too much on the social programs. We should be aware that nothing is guaranteed and this is really a daily fight to be credible, to have the trust of the markets. So this is the mentality we should change, not so much the institutions and the treaties.”
However, Europe talks a lot about the creation of the economic government, at least in the eurozone.
“No doubt, there is a need for more cooperation, but I am really skeptical on some wordings. In French it is called ‘gouvernement economique’ and it is something different from the ‘economic governance.’ I think we should avoid this ambiguity because you can end up sitting between all chairs. The europhiles would say: OK, this is not enough that the EU economic governance holds meetings two times a year, this is nothing. And the euroskeptics would say: now you see, they want much more, more centralized and more bureaucratic Europe run by Brussels. So you can really end up between all chairs. I think the honest way, the transparent way is to have more coordination, more cooperation and we have to take the criteria seriously. I think if this happens a lot will improve.”
What do you personally think is better for Europe: to create something like the United States of Europe or everything should remain as it is?
“We will never become the United States of Europe like the United States of America with one superpowered president who can overrun the parliament, who has de facto the absolute power for the term of four years and some areas are completely centralized. This is not our vision. I think, the European model is the management of diversity, respecting 27 or soon, with Croatia, 28 member states, 200 or 300 regions, more than 50 concrete and important languages. I think this is not a uniform, centralized European state with a president, a parliament, etc. This should be a much more coordinated way, on the other hand, respecting the sovereignty of nation states and acting in a subsidiary way.”
Back in 2004 you declared that the EU has to pursue the neighborhood policy towards Ukraine and some other countries in the East and emphasized that these countries do not have any prospects to become the EU members. Have you changed your mind?
“I think this is a more complicated and more interesting issue. With 28 member states we are running to an end. Institutionally we can not expand to 40 or 45 members. This is impossible. Otherwise we will end up as OSCE which is not very coherent and active. But there is a big ‘but’: we have to develop the specific directions eastwards to Ukraine, Russia and southwards to the Mediterranean. These two areas, the eastern neighborhood and the southern neighborhood are so important to us. We should create something that is not full membership but very strong link in the economic area, maybe, some security and political cooperation. It could be a very deep and wide range of cooperation but it must be something different. Today we have only either full membership or nothing. This will not work. We need really some more creative formulas in the end.”
You probably know that the current Ukrainian government declares its desire to join the EU and believes that it can happen within 10-15 years. I would like to quote Napoleon Bonaparte who wrote during his exile on Saint Helena that he had wanted to create the European judicial system so that there was one European nation. Probably, Europe will never have one nation but it would not be bad for Europe to have the European laws and judicial system in Ukraine and expend this way its zone of stability and prosperity to the East.
“This is possible. You can establish, so to say, a common space of security. This is a long vision or dream and I would not deny that NATO, Russia, Ukraine and the Black Sea region could become a coherent zone of security. The same could be in the economic free trade zone from the West to the East, to Vladivostok. It is possible to create common rules in the judiciary system. This is absolutely possible. What is not possible, in my opinion, is to have so to say, an extended number of member states from now, 28 to 45. This will not work and we will end up with no coherence anymore.”
Ukrainian Foreign Minister Kostiantyn Hryshchenko has once claimed that the membership of Ukraine in the EU will reinforce the European community. As far as I know a lot of member states support the membership of Ukraine since our country will strengthen the EU that is very important now when the size matters on the international arena. What do you think about it?
“If you ask me, my honest answer is that we have so many problems just to keep the level of integration. You see now, there is a big danger; you see now the possibility of a break-up or tensions or tiny breaks within the eurozone. De facto, we are entering now in affairs of different sort of membership inside the European Union. This cannot be our dream. I think there is the need to keep the members of the Union mostly on the same level. This is your hard job to do, by the way. If you now additionally enlarge and enlarge then you would create enormous problems and imbalances which is not good. I think, what we have to have in mind are linkages, bindings, expanding treaties, bringing in the neighborhood policy, partnership programs, investments, cooperation in science and technology. So, there is a lot to do.”
However, Ukraine has become a certain apple of discord between the EU and Russia. Moscow is trying to make Kyiv enter the Customs Union giving an ultimatum that it will decrease the gas price only in exchange for the gas pipeline. Meanwhile the Ukrainian government declares the desire to join the EU and sign the association agreement and the agreement on the deep comprehensive free trade zone. That is why I would like to ask you: what is better for the EU – accepting Ukraine or leaving it in the Russia’s zone of influence?
“Ukraine is a big country and it is one of the biggest countries of Europe. You are not dependant; you do not need to join Russia or the EU. I think this is a question of self-confidence, of dignity. You should not be pushed around neither from the EU’s side, nor from Russia’s side. I think, Ukraine is a very important partner for us and we should be really looking forward to contributing to the good development of Ukraine. Not everything is perfect; you know that, we are really skeptical on some developments now in Ukraine. We are not absolutely satisfied with the previous years. But anyway, it is up to you, you have to decide which way to go.”
We have already decided where to go, to the EU.
“No, you have to decide which direction Ukraine has to go internally. This means the independent judiciary system, respecting the rule of law, developing the middle class, encouraging small and medium-sized companies. This is important. Do not trust the big companies. You know, the mystery of the successful German model is the famous ‘Mittelstand,’ the middle class. This is fantastic; they have millions of small or medium-sized family-owned businesses, not the big stock exchange companies, but millions of very creative and competitive family businesses. This exists neither in Ukraine nor in Russia. This is something we should really develop. The question of membership is a political one. My opinion is that we have to be more creative than either membership or nothing. And this ‘in between’ can be very close to the membership.”
Lord WEIDENFELD: It is very important that Ukraine belongs to Europe
The head of the London publishing house Weidenfeld Amp; Nicolson Lord George Weidenfeld and Potsdam mayor Jann Jakobs are co-chairmen of the M100 Sanssouci Colloquium deliberative body. Weidenfeld was among the initiators of this international journalists’ forum. This year the 92-year-old British publisher, philanthropist and author of the numerous publications has been given an M100 Honorary Award for the active support of this international journalists’ colloquium. Despite his advanced age, lord Weidenfeld is very active and he knows about everything happening in Europe. He kindly agreed to answer a couple of questions.
Do you think Ukraine has to take a due place in Europe as a member of the European community?
“Yes, I do.”
I have just talked to the former Austrian chancellor Wolfgang Schussel. He thinks that Europe has to have special relations with Ukraine that do not provide for the membership. What do you think about it?
“This is his opinion. My opinion is different. I think it is very important that Ukraine belongs to Europe. On the other hand, it is important for Europe, too.”
Why do some European politicians think that Ukraine should not be in Europe?
“They are afraid that it will exacerbate relations with Russia. Another reason is that it [Ukraine. – Ed.] is a huge country with a lot of population. And Europe at the moment is rather defensive, you see.”
Ukrainian Foreign Minister Kostiantyn Hryshchenko has told his European counterparts that if Ukraine joins the EU it will strengthen the European community. What is your opinion?
“Yes, in the long run, but right at the moment Europe is in a very exhausted position and cannot afford to have more people. But in the long run Ukraine belongs to Europe.”
Do you think that the EU should give the membership prospects to Ukraine in order to intensify the European integration and reforms, as the Ukrainian government insists?
“Eventually, yes.”
