Le CLANdestin européen

Where Einstein meets a spaghetti Bolognese plate under a cloud of volcano ashes….

Babel Strasbourg — Thu, 18 Nov 2010 12:41:00 +0100

Did you ever consider the environmental impact of a portion of spaghetti Bolognese? Did you ever wonder if Einstein had a love life? Did you ever dream of exploring the heart of a volcano? You did? Then you might be one of the thousands of self-ignored science fans! And the European Science TV and New Media Festival are made for you.

To discover more about the event and the place of science in today's media, we talked to Andrew Millington, the Festival Director and founder of PAWS, a science communication agency based in London, and co-organizer of the event (http://www.pawsdrama.com/index.htm).

A festival dedicated to the promotion of science in TV and new media programmes

Held in Strasbourg with the collaboration of Euroscience (http:// www.euroscience.org), from the 22 to the 23 October 2010, the Festival offered spectators a large range of science films. As well as hosting established science magazines, the Festival put the emphasis on programmes that have developed an informal, humorous, or even show-business approach to science (for the synopsis of the selected programmes check on http://www.euroscience.org/2010,36518,en.html). ‘Quality, diversity, originality’ was meant to be catchphrase for the current selection. Presenting films that appeal to all generations has also been part of the selection challenge. While drama style seems to suit older generations, new media products are undeniably aimed at younger people. The YouTube reports produced by CERNTv (1) offer a good example of how the web can serve as a medium for the circulation of scientific information (http://www.youtube.com/user/CERNTV).

The Award evening 2010 will be held in London in conjunction with the BBC Year of Science, on 22 November 2010. Prizes in four TV and new media genres (documentary, drama, general TV programs and new media) will be distributed in addition to three special prizes (best environment progamme, best presentation on or by a women scientist or engineer, best documentary according to a teenage jury) .

The aim of this festival is twofold. Firstly, it intends to bring the best of European television to a larger audience i.e. to show widely how science features in TV and new media programming. Secondly, it is meant to be a forum bringing together the different professions involved, from scientists to engineers, from writers to producers, to discuss scientific issues with an audio-visual focus. The Festival’s 2010 edition has been announced as a newly styled version. Although it has been happening on a European level for ten years, this was the first time that the festival covered all the genres (TV and new media) and will award additional special prizes. Since its creation, the awards were held in London for historical reasons. From next year on however, it is the hope of the organizers to hold both the festival and the awards ceremony in Strasbourg. Such a move would clearly boost the festival in terms of visibility. Strasbourg has been sort of an obvious choice: it is a city with a definite European feel and it is the home of the Euro Science Foundation’s headquarters. Despite the shortcomings of this year’s edition (a limited budget and some films screened in English only) the feedback has been good. The Festival Director is confident that from next year onwards, films will be screened in both English and French to appeal to a wider audience.

The challenges of science communication

PAW labels itself as a science communication agency. Its objective is to use the whole range of audio-visual tools available to enhance communication and understanding of science and technology. In a world that is rapidly changing and where new forms of media are continuously emerging, such activity will be playing an increasingly important role. PAW produces various programmes and events to bring science to different audiences (general public, TV producers etc…) in a very user friendly form. Asked about the difficulties faced when devising new means to reach a larger audience, our interlocutor categorically rejected the idea that viewers, whatever their age, are not interested in science. The challenge is merely about finding the means to reach them. Obviously, nowadays many of us seek to know more about science and technology. Essentially because we want to be informed about issues that affects us on a daily basis (nuclear power, energy, climate change, new medical treatments…) . Even if we don’t always realize it, scientific knowledge has become vital when it comes to making a good judgment, be it in our personal life or in political processes.

Questioning the pretty reduced place of science in TV programmes, I got a clear-cut reaction: no, it is not! It is the amount of exclusive science which is reduced, but if one looks at things more closely, there is more science in the media than it appears at first glace. New treatments, environmental issues, new ways of tracking security etc… are topics that are regularly making their way to general programming (in news programmes, in drama). That brings us to one of the core issues of science communication: how do you sell science to media producers and broadcasters essentially worried about their audience scores? The selling line goes like that: if science is left in a ghetto, it has no dedicated audience. Therefore, a science communicator has to convince producers and broadcasters that science has a broader audience, namely that science is interesting. Indeed science can be hiding behind sports, behind cooking, etc… The festival and awards were precisely designed with that intention.

When the media crowd meets scientists/engineers, they inevitably end up talking about popularization of science. Popularization is not bad. Even the scientists themselves have to simplify because only few people can understand their particular area of research. One can either simplify or do the opposite, break the rule of science. While the former is perfectly justifiable, the latter is not tolerable. Unless one does it in such a way that it is obviously fun ….like in Startreck for instance! If done properly, popularization can be a great communication instrument. That’s why the popularization process must be kept under careful scrutiny by experts. However not all scientists are showing the same willingness to embark in the production of media programmes. But their involvement is necessary. In the UK for instance, scientists have to spend a certain percentage of their grant on popularization. The initiative may be unique to the UK but it is an idea that could grow elsewhere.

Throughout the discussion with the Festival Director, it became clear gradually that science at large and science communication in particular is participating in the efforts towards creating a European identity. To have a strong European level of operation has become necessary, as working exclusively at the national level represents a huge waste of efforts. Making a parallel with sports, Andrew Millington explained that Europe has now ways of expressing itself. A structure like the ESOF (2) congress, similar to the Champion’s league and the Rider’s cup in terms of functions, is capable of fostering the European dimension in the field of science and bridge the gap between science and society. With such structure, Europe can be confident and stand shoulder to shoulder with America or other world scientific contenders, if at times European scientists do not forget to be outward looking.

(1) The European Organization for Nuclear Research is one of the world’s largest and most respected centres for scientific research. Its business is fundamental physics, finding out what the universe is made of and how it works. To that aim, it operates the Large Hadron Collider, or particle accelerator, based in Geneva, Switzerland.

(2) ESOF – Euroscience Open Forum – is the biennal pan-European meeting dedicated to scientific research and innovation. At ESOF meetings leading scientists, researchers, business people, entrepreneurs and innovators, policy makers, science and technology communicators and the general public from all over Europe discuss new discoveries and debate the direction that research is taking.!

Picture 1 : Tania Gisselbrecht

Picture 2 : Euroscience.

- Christoph Falkenroth, MINTIFF Science and TV Drama Project, Technical University of Berlin
- Andrew Millington, President of the Festival Européen du Téléfilm et des Nouveaux Médias pour la Science and founder of Omni Communications and the PAWS venture

- Roland Schlich, Specialist in Earth Sciences, Emeritus Research Director(CNRS)

- Anett Sager, Editor for Science, Documentaries Department, ARTE Strasbourg

European encounters AJPE: Sakharov Prize 2009

Babel Strasbourg — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 13:46:00 +0100

On the occasion of the 2009 Sakharov Prize Award Ceremony on Wednesday 16 December, the Association of European Paliamentary Journalists (AJPE) is organising a European Encounter bringing together Representatives of the Russian prize-winning association, MEMORIAL, and Members of the European Parliament,

at 18h30 in the Aubette Building (1st floor) on the Place Kleber in Strasbourg.

Issues to be debated include the effectiveness of the Sakharov (and other) Prizes in promoting peace and democratic values; human rights and democracy in the Russian Federation 20 years after the death of Andrei Sakharov; and the role of the EU in promoting fundamental freedoms worldwide.

Participants at this European Encounter which is open to the public (interpretation into French, English and Russian) and enjoys support from the City of Strasbourg and the European Parliament will include:

MEMORIAL Representatives : Oleg ORLOV, Chair of the Human Rights Centre Memorial, Sergeï KOVALEV, Chair of the Board of the Andrei Sakharov Foundation, Lyudmila ALEXEEVA, Head of the Moscow Helsinki Group

MEPs : Heidi HAUTALA, Chair of the Sub-committee on Human Rights, Ana GOMES, member of the Sub-committee on Human Rights, Jacek SARYUSZ-WOLSKI, member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Edward McMILLAN-SCOTT, Vice-President of the European Parliament and member of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs.

The discussions will be chaired by AJPE President and Portuguese Radio and Television (RTP)European correspondent, Fernanda GABRIEL, and Radio Radicale European Correspondent, David CARRETTA.

The Council of Europe renews dialogue with Belarus

Babel Strasbourg — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 17:44:00 +0100

Strasbourg, Council of Europe, summer plenary session of June 2009

By Pauline André
Translated by Morgane Poder

Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) – First session – from 22 to 26 June 2009

The Council of Europe that has not been on speaking terms with Belarus this past twelve years turns once again towards it. Following the opening of the Information Point in the Belarusian capital at the beginning of June, the Parliamentary Assembly decided, on 23 June, to restore the special guest status of Belarus in the plenary sessions in Strasbourg – yet upon conditions.

A very special guest. As the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) decided on 23 June, Belarus should gain back its “special guest” status after having been suspended from the plenary sessions since 13 June 1997. The Council of Europe instituted the special guest status in 1989 to simplify the accession process of the East European countries. This status is granted to non-EU states provided that they have ratified or adhered to the Helsinki Final Act and show a degree of progress in the field of human rights and democracy  the state in question loses this status. The Belarusian parliamentarians could thus attend the debates of the PACE  but without voting. Apart from special guests, other observers are also admitted to the parliamentary sessions. Even though they do not have any right to vote either, they share the same ideals and values of the Council of Europe. Currently this applies to three countries: Canada, Israel and Mexico.

The adopted decision (with 160 votes out of 167 ) is a great step forward for the country, which has been denied candidacy to the Council of Europe since 1993. Belarus ranks among the countries that still have not abolished death penalty. Therefore, the Assembly will restore the Belarusian guest status, provided the government “transforms the de facto moratorium on the death penalty into a legal moratorium as an intermediate step towards its complete abolition,” underlined Andréa Rigoni, the liberal Italian parliamentarian, the author of the report that was presented on 23 June. The Assembly acknowledges the efforts made by Belarus towards human rights. For instance, nine opposition activists were released in 2008 and the new opposition movement called “For Liberty” was created in 2007. However, the Belarusian constitution  that foresees a democratic state  is still a phantom constitution. Democracy and constitutional state are far from being a reality in the country.

According to the Belarusian press, the government is ready to establish a moratorium on death penalty for it is preoccupied with gaining back its special guest status as well as a “good image” in front of the European Union. Yet, the government does not consider membership in the Council of Europe or sharing its political values whereas the Belarusian opposition is fighting for the country to be a member of the organisation. “It would allow the Belarusian civil society to have access to an independent judiciary system the European Court for Human Rights...,” explains Anatolij Lebedko, member of the opposition who attends the Assembly session. (According to the press agency BelaPan).

Belarus is now facing three entities who want the country to take action. First, the Council of Europe is ready to return the government its special guest status and renew the dialogue providing that the country keeps on making efforts towards democracy and the establishment of a moratorium on death penalty. Secondly, Belarus also was started to get closer to the European Union, which could bring a financial support to the government in order to settle its 244 million Dollars debts to Russia. Finally, the country must face Russia, which is furious on Belarus moving closer to the European Union. In the past weeks, the relations between Moscow and Minsk have grown very tense and PM Putin keeps imposing embargos on Belarus. According to a press release of the French Press Agency (AFP) on 26 June, the Russian giant Gazprom planned to reduce its gas exports to the country. According to the French parliamentarian Laurent Bétille, “Minsk needs Europe to free itself from this quite oppressing relationship with Moscow and also out of economical reasons.” Whatever Minsk should decide, it will be a turning point for the country.

The Parliamentary Assembly is divided on the issue of nuclear energy

Babel Strasbourg — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 17:31:00 +0100

By Pauline André
Translated by Morgan Poder

Strasbourg, Council of Europe, PACE 2009 summer plenary session

On Thursday 25 June, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe discussed two reports that remind the governments of our planet of the urgency to change our energetic system. Whereas the first report on renewable energy and environment was unanimously adopted, the second one on nuclear power and sustainable development became a subject of debate.

Controversy flared up across the benches of the Assembly. “Nuclear energy is an essential economical alternative if we want to reach the goals that were set through the Kyoto Protocol,” claimed Bill Etherington (United Kingdom, Socialist Group) – author of the report on “Nuclear energy and sustainable development.” Yet not everybody agrees with him and some parliamentarians consider his pro-nuclear ideas are too zealous. Almost a third of them insist on the fact that this kind of energy leads to a fundamental issue – that of radioactive waste management. Not only it endangers health and pollutes, but it is neither reusable or recyclable according to current technological and financial means. “What should be the advantage of such energy?” questioned a Swiss parliamentarian, member of the socialist group. “It is just like replacing C02 emissions by nuclear waste. Let us find a solution to this issue before we even support this energy,” insisted she before appealing to the Assembly to vote against the report. Her speech was applauded by the audience.

The majority of parliamentarians are nevertheless still convinced that nuclear energy is useful – especially in the current context of the urgency to stop the fossil fuels consumption (oil, coal and gas) in order to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions. Renewable energy cannot be ignored as a solution to greenhouse effect, even if it is not enough. We have to combine different sources of energy into what the experts have called the “energy bunch”. But in which proportions? That is the question. Being well aware of the huge challenge of radioactive waste, the parliamentarians in favour of this report advocate that there should be massive investments into fourth generation reactors that would replace the third generation of EPR reactors. As they are more efficient, they would help reducing the quantity and toxicity of waste. An Italian parliamentarian stands up for this new kind of reactor: “Renewable energy would never cover more than a third or a fourth of our needs. Therefore, the Italian government decided to opt for nuclear power and the new generation of plants. In this way, we will not be held hostages by those who control the gas tap.”

Nuclear power as a backup energy

However, the fourth generation reactor is still at the concept stage. According to the French Atomic Energy Commission, (Commissariat à l'Energie Atomique - CEA), we will have to wait for it to be operational until 2040 - at the earliest. And nuclear power is no renewable energy. In the end, it will run out equally like any fossil fuels. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is expecting a significant drop in uranium production by the 2050s. The fourth generation reactor risks to be too late available in order to prevent the decline of nuclear energy. The parliamentarians did not evoke this drawback for the majority of them are still convinced that nuclear power is a solution that everybody should consider.

The debate on the interest and the long-term effects of such energy cannot be solved. Even though nuclear energy may answer our needs with less C02 emissions and at cheaper prices than those of fossil fuels, how are we going to replace uranium as soon as it is to come to an end and what will happen to the waste created during all those years? Even Bill Etherington has to admit in his report that nuclear is merely a temporary solution, which is only worthwhile for “a short length of time – 80 years at the most.”

It was almost 18:30 when the Assembly concluded. With the adoption of the report by 47 votes against 11, the parliamentarians encourage governments to develop this energy. According to the survey Elecnuc, which was carried out by the French Atomic Energy Commission, already 76.9% of the electricity consumption of 2008 in France came from nuclear power. The country beats all the international records concerning the number of reactors per number of inhabitants – According to the French Nuclear Safety Authority, there were 58 reactors for 64 million French citizens in 2008. Moreover, France ranks amongst the countries with the lowest C02 emissions. Nuclear power will indeed help reducing greenhouse gas effects by 2050. However, we still have to find a solution to the issue of waste management and to the temporary nature of nuclear energy ressources. This is barely a stopgap measure.

Read more on the subject:

TerraEco, the magazine for sustainability
Official website of the documentary “An Inconvenient Truth", Davis Guggenheim, 2006.
L’atlas du Monde diplomatique, Special edition of 2008 « Un monde à l’envers »

(Photo: flickr/Pil)

Green flags flying high at the European Court for Human Rights

Babel Strasbourg — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 22:11:00 +0100

Strasbourg, June 25th 2009

By Pauline André
Translated by Morgane Poder

It is soon 18h30 as some 40 people are demonstrating in front of the European Court for Human Rights as a sign of support to the Iran people. Whether they have been in exile for a long time, or are young Iranians who came to France to study in peace, or French citizens showing solidarity, they are all shocked by the brutality of the government which strengthens its repression every day. They have come round a rectangular table decorated with candles and covered with the Iranian flag in order to wear the colour green. As colour of Mir Hossein Moussavi’s campaign – the candidate of the opposition – the colour green has now become a symbol for the struggle of the Iranian people against the political system. Rashne was 20 years old when he left Iran. He is now 29 and has not seen his family since. He did not attend his sister’s weddings. Yet going back to Iran is out of the question for him as long as the Mullah government remains in power. “You have no liberty in Iran, it is like being in prison,” told Rashne. He was expelled from his football club because he did not how to pray. “Everything there is linked to religion,” he explained. You do not even have the right to walk with your girlfriend in the street. The police officers demand to see your identity papers and if you are not married, you end up being arrested.” The Iranians feel stifled under this cultural dictatorship, in Rashne’s opinion, a lot of them are more and more “disgusted” with religion.

Like all other the demonstrators who came today, he is expecting the international community to take a firm stand. After the first demonstration in front of the European Council at 13h30, the march reached the European Court for Human Rights in order to hold a sit-in with candles in their hands. On board signs that the demonstrators are carrying, you can read various slogans such as “We all are Neda”, “Where is my vote?”, “Stop massacres in Iran”, as well as “Ahmadinejad is not our president.” They all join in “Yar-e Dabestani,” a revolutionary song that the students used to chant in 1979 to protest against the Shah’s dictatorship.

“We need the international community,” explained the speaker of the Iranian Collective of Strasbourg. “We ask that Ahmadinejad is not acknowled as our president. And we want the European Court to condemn his violation of human rights in Iran.” For this young woman, the report adopted on Thursday morning by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe is already a great victory. However, she laments the fact that the Council does not show enough “sternness.” She also fled Iran in search of liberty. In 1993, she arrived late at her university – 5 minutes too late. She sat amongst some boys and a Muslim student asked her to move and find another sit. The conflict between religion and atheism turned into a riot and Shireen, regarded as responsible for the altercation, was expelled from the university a few days later. “That really stunned me. I decided to leave and I swore never to come back again as long as the government is still in power.” For those Iranian refugees – as for many other people in exile – fleeing the homeland is a matter of survival. After the 1979 revolution, which ended the Shah’s dictatorship, being a musician was really frowned upon. Papak was 18 years old and the conductor of the symphonic orchestra of Teheran when he left for France. “France welcomed me but Iran remains in my heart,” explains Papak although he will not go back either. “I am sceptical about the future of my country for the repression is so strong. This future is in the hands of the Iranian people, for only they can over throw the government.” Unlike him, Rashne feels hopeful: “For the first time in 30 years, the people stands united.” It is soon 20h as the sun goes down on the European Court and demonstrators stand up. A member of the Collective speaks into the microphone to read a text of support which ends with a famous sentence by Ghandi: “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.” With their arms stretched out skywards as a symbol for hope, everyone sings to the tune of the Iranian popular hymn that used to be sung during the Iranian revolution, “Ey Iran”.

(Photo: Flickr/Simone.utzeri)

Council of Europe involves civil society to accelerate initiatives on common migration policy

Babel Strasbourg — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 16:14:00 +0100

Strasbourg, February 2009

By Ivanna Pinyak

The EU migration policy belongs to the so-called third pillar, so it refers to the competence of each Member State. However, the global cross-country human influx overtakes the national boundaries level and adds up to stronger arguments in favour of a common migration policy. European countries have different migration traditions and history but one common reality. While the debates on the common migration policy in Europe gained a larger dimension and overspread the Europe of 27, the Council of Europe launched its further initiatives in this direction involving the civil society of 47.

First PACE public debates

June 24th, 2008, Parliamentary Assembly of the Counsil of Europe first organised wide public debates on migration and democracy in European States involving 40 NGOs and the European parliamentarians in Strasbourg.

The extended audience could have discussed before adoption of the 2 PACE documents: resolution 1617 “State of democracy in Europe. Measures to improve the democratic participation of migrants” and the recommendation 1840 “State of democracy in Europe. Specific challenges facing European democracies; the case of diversity and migration”.

The two reporters whose work served the basis of the above-mentioned documents called on the public to make no difference between immigrants no matter their country of origin: EU Member State or not. There should not be any “second” (from EU) or “third” (from non-EU) zones.

Civil society actors could have enriched the discussions on such key points, stated in the 2 documents, as: non-discrimination policy, wider information on other cultures, efforts to stop criminalising immigrants, but to get them easy access to health care education and justice in the adoption country. Another crucial issue was about orientation program, meant for immigrants who would often come from the countries with no democracy and respectively with no idea of the notion. An increased role of political parties and of the media in the migrants’ integration was particularly underlined.

Domains requiring international regulation and procedures

Particular agreements and procedures are highly required on the European and international levels with regards to minors, women, irregular migrants, refugees and other categories. Some progress is done, we must admit. Minor migrants now have status and are treated separately from adults. Migration is no longer a collective mass, but every case is treated individually.

However, further step is up to the national governments to assume their part of responsibility, as well as to cooperate with the other countries concerned. Then, the final objective should be the common coherent and exhaustive migration policy on the continent.

COE and Red Cross/Crescent societies

As soon as the migration factor is a source of manipulation for certain political reasons, these are humanitarians who need to reinforce their efforts at the place.

Aware of this, the COE and the French Red Cross society co-organised a seminar on migration last week (on February 19-20th, 2009) in Strasbourg. The aim was to bring together humanitarian and political actors, as both of them represent an important axe of work of the European committee on migration of the COE. The 2-day seminar focused on 2 extremely sensitive issues, such as family reunification of unaccompanied minor migrants and force return of migrants to their country of origin.

Corien Jonker, Chair of the PACE Committee on Migration, Refugees and Population, said “the clash between reception and return is deepening in our member states, especially in the context of the current economic crisis”. So, she expressed a need of “a sound and realistic return policy overall in Europe”. Maud de Boer-Buquicchio, Deputy Secretary General of the Council of Europe, proposed to synthesize the Council’s appropriate arsenal to serve as "model agreement" for countries regarding the reception and return of unaccompanied minors.

The representatives of the French Red Cross society want such a meeting to contribute into the common migration policy. So does COE. Mike Hancock, the British parliamentarian to the PACE, has shown himself “controversial” as encouraging everybody to be precise in discussions: who, when and how should be doing in the return country after the migrants forced return to get those people a proper care and integration.

Representatives of many countries facing the migration problems could have worked together in workshops. Some countries don’t have to tackle these problems so far, but cannot be sure for the future. Members of Estonian Red Cross society, for example, explained, they came to the seminar, because “in our globalised world their country might have to face the migration problem in a couple of years, so, it’s better to anticipate”.

Statistics

Statistics is there –8,8% migrants in Europe! In France, for instance, every 8th citizen has one foreign parent or grand-parent. The number of international migrants is rising faster than the world population of which it represents nearly 3%, said Jean François Mattéi, President of the French Red Cross. According to him, put together, those 3% would virtually form the 5th biggest country in the world. 30 to 40 million migrants or 15 to 20% of the world migrant population are in an illegal situation.

The migration potential today is extraordinary and should be wisely managed for constructive purposes. So, better start to include people Instead of excluding them.

Picture 1 : L’Europe devant l’immigration. Plantu, Le Monde du 21 juin 2003
Picture 2 : Cimade - Carte de la rétention en Europe
Picture 4 : Le Monde diplomatique, Alain Morice, Mars 2004

Les Nuits Européennes

Babel Strasbourg — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 14:27:00 +0100

To kick off the Nuits Européennes Äl Jawala and Electrik G.E.M come to Offenburg

By Séverine Guthier and Aleksandra Lendzinska

It is 7pm. In the Offenburg Riding School the final preparations are taking place. In the former exercise hall of the French armed forces you can hear both French and German instructions. Everything is perfect. The chairs are out, the lights are working and the sound is promising. We meet with Jean-Etienne Moldo from Arcane 17, Organiser of the 13th Nuits Européenes in Strasbourg and Offenburg. He seems slightly nervous but very confident.

To the interview on Radiodistrict by Aleksandra Lendzinska…

“The idea of the festival Nuits Européenes is to use music to discover Europe. How do you show people that Europe is not complicated or something to be scared of? Instead, Europe is something that we should be optimistic about. We are using music as a means of communication that can be understood all over the world.”

While we speak with Moldo, about the planned programme of today’s opening evening and the next five days, an audience slowly but surely gathers outside the door. The audience are mainly from Offenburg and have been lured by the “Elektrik Grand Ensemble Méditerranée (Electrik G.E.M.)” with expectations of a Mediterranean evening. And with good reason. The young French band Electrik G.E.M. have come with good intentions. Guests from Strasbourg and Mulhouse have also come for this evenings events. “Actually it’s not that far” said a young guy from Strasbourg, who admits he rarely goes to Germany just for a visit. Overall, the audience is mixed. They are looking forward to this evening, looking forward to enjoying the relaxed and friendly atmosphere, even if they do not know which language to communicate in. “It has not always been like this”, noted one guest, “Such a simply terrific evening –moving forward while looking back to history. We must keep building bridges. We want to be able to cross the European bridge from France to Germany, we want to be able to show that others can easily come to us. I look forward to a Balkans evening!” A young couple from Strasbourg are looking forward to the second band of the evening “Electrik G.E.M.”. In their opinion such an evening should take place more often as there are too few opportunities to get to know music and bands from other countries.

“We want to get artists from other countries known here, to offer people an enjoyable and exciting evening and also discover new bands,” said Moldo. The programme Nuits Européenes, which will run until the 18th October, is very varied. For example, after the Franco-German evening this Saturday, on Wednesday 15th October there will be a Russian evening. There will also be music from the Norwegian artists Bjørn Berge, Jewish music from the American David Krakauer, Solvenian music from Longital and Slovakian music from Terrafolk. Moldo is particularly looking forward to music from the East because it is so unknown. Proof that the programme works well is the band from Freiburg, Äl Jawala. Their music combines typical sounds and rhythms of the Balkans with modern Funk, Jazz and Electro.

8pm, people stream into the riding school which has a very special atmosphere. The artists are very satisfied with the technical equipment. Coincidentally we come across one of the band members of the young French Band, “Electrik G.E.M.”- not difficult really as there are 14 members. Soon after we meet the other members of the bands who are eating in Pascha, a small pub just behind the riding school. Yves Beraud quickly puts his cutlery to one side and accompanies us outside, where we have a question and answer session. He plays the accordion, which initially confuses us, because the likeable young man with his short modern haircut does not look like a typical accordionist. The ‘Elektrik Grand Ensemble Méditerranée’ is a good project for young talented musicians. They see themselves as musical travellers in the Mediterranean. They draw up new borders to jump over. The whole Mediterranean region regards them as one big metropolis as they play so many different sounds and styles, from gypsy music, modern rock to strange sounds from the Maghred. They unite their musical traditions and modernity to create a new harmony. For them, this festival is “a good opportunity to get known in Germany”, said Yves Beraud. Because, although Germany is quite close, I never go there. I think that will change in the future”.

9pm - The stage is free for Äl Jawala and their Balkan Beats. The riding school is well attended and the audience listen relaxed to the music of the young, unknown band on the stage. By the second song peoplehave got out of their seats and the audience mix on the stage. By the end not even the 70 year old woman from Cottbus is in her seat. She mixes with the dancing audience and dances equally elated.

The music from Äl Jawala is intoxicating. Both happy and sad, it is full of emotion. You can understand what the saxophonists, Steffi Schimmer and Krischan Lukanow, want to say when they talk of their struggle. Defiant and angry, like a discussion between a child and his mother, and in the end the mother gives up with a smile and the son wins. Quieter sounds begin. The didgeridoo, played be Daniel Pellegrini, starts. Contemplative sad sounds rise up to euphoria. The Frenchman, Daniel Verdier, animates the audience, getting them to sing along to the rhythms and then the bassist plays a solo. Then there is percussion dual between Markus Schumacher and Daniel Pellegrini. Five characters, each has their freedom, all play a game on their instruments and with the audience. And together they make music with “head on, dirty Gypsy and Kelzmer Grooves and beats that deliver drum ‘n’ Bass and Ragga effects”, notes the critic Richard Schuberth, Artistic Director of the Balkan Fever Festivals.

After the concert we had the opportunity to meet the five young artists. Steffi (Saxophone) was “totally crazy” about the atmosphere in the riding school and was pleased with her concert. It only matters to her that she has fun on the stage and the audience also have fun. “We play and everyone dances and has fun. That’s the way it should be!". Äl Jawala do not describe themselves as a mainstream group. They do what they do and that we were able to see this evening. The music, full of life, reaches out to every age group. The styles are well mixed and jazz-up modern music.

Daniel (Bass): “Äl Jawala comes from Arabic and means the nomads”.

Steffi (Sax): “Despite that, we don’t make Arabic music! But we started from there. At that point we didn’t have a concept in our heads. We got to know each other, we met up and we jammed together. Very easy. A friend, who played percussion, was half Egyptian. And at this point we thought up our name. It was simply that Arabic music was closer than anything else. Also, the music that we played that that point was partly from Magreb or, rather, was classically oriental. But it was also jazzy, funk and was already open to all. Also, even if you can’t find much of it today, we know where we come from and we can prove it!

Markus (Percussion): “It shows in our music. In the Arabic music world, there are many mixes of major and minor chords which combine opposites like happy and sad. The feelings are different and you can play better like that”.

Arabic origin, Arabic name, Arabic logo. But today your connection with Romania is even more pronounced. Where does that come from?

Markus: By coincidence we’ve gotten to know one of the most well known bands in Romania. They were looking for bands for a festival. They invited us and we drove there with a VW Bus and it was quite simply unbelievable.

Steffi: So we arrived and that’s where it all happened! This concert, at this festival with these people, got the crowd going. We had such a crazy time! We thought, hey, we come as German dudes and didn’t realise the Romanians could have such a good festival with such music. We were really sceptical. It was either sink or swim. We had no idea how it would pan out. But the response was more than positive.

Markus: The story of the last three years has brought us to the main square in Bucharest where we played to over 5000 people.

The current album is called “Lost in Manele”. What does that mean?

Steffi: The phrase Manele is the absolute ubiquitous mainstream music in Romania and I think it also reaches a bit out to the Balkans. Romania used to produce music that was rooted in musical tradition but at the moment the music is quite tacky. That is in principle what hip hop music is doing here, by that I mean it is actually only cheap and trashy with undemanding texts. It’s all about money, women, flash cars and success. And the musical content is low. This “Manele” is, in the Romanian context, hated by people who love music or who love their traditions. So we come and play our Manele and as feedback we get completely overjoyed Romanians who say that “hey- somehow you manage to bring our own culture back to us. But in a way that our culture respects. That is something that mixes the old with the new and raises something else: other grooves, other contexts other images but at the same time with respect. Hence the title “Lost in Manele”

At the moment the five are taking some time to record their first proper studio album that will be released in May next year. After that they are looking forward to their tour. Since their inception the artists and their music has changed a lot but there is one thing that they want to hold on to. For them their tradition, both musical and cultural, is very important. They treat their tradition with respect, even if they change it with their music.

Steffi: I think the worst that can happen is to forget where you come from. I think as the world becomes smaller it is even more important for people to know where they stand and where they come from.

At the end of the evening they are all pleased. The bands, the audience. Even Moldo. In our interview he said "Tradition must be preserved, but you must also always be open to new things". With the European festival he wants to show Europe his music and bring people together. The different traditions show how something new can develop without damaging their origin. The warm-up couldn't have been better. The two bands, both from different backgrounds, have immersed themselves in different cultures to create something new - and they get great reactions not just here but in the home countries as well.

Achieving the European ideal through the actions of its citizens

Babel Strasbourg — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 09:00:00 +0100

By Géraldine Canet
Translation by Rob Compton

What would it be like if our value system were reclaimed from the European space by the citizens of Europe? Five students have recently set an example by signing up to a campaign to ride their push-bikes from the north-eastern French city of Lille to Olympia in Greece. They are trying to raise European awareness about the ‘Tree for Greece’ campaign, which aims to reforest areas devastated by the fires in summer 2007. Upon their arrival on 30 June 2008 an appeal was made to the ‘European brotherhood’.

A few days after the start of the French presidency of the European Union, after the Irish 'no' vote and various protests against social regression in Europe, we should try to gain perspective on the situation, to look around us and take a bit of time for ourselves. Imagine that we, as European citizens, took control of our future and decided to base our daily lives on the values of brotherhood, solidarity, equality among peoples, ethical economics and respect for the environment. These are all values advocated by the European Union, but which it sometimes struggles to implement from above. This new civil movement could be so strong! What a positive idea and what a good example for future generations!

"Integrating core values such as solidarity, courage and enthusiasm is a matter of conscience"

Moved by the catastrophic fires that ravaged Greece in the summer of 2007, William Bouton, Harsh Doshi, Julien Druelle, Chrisophe Goncalves and Roman Renuy, students at the Ecole Superieure des Affaires, a business management school in Lille, created a group called ‘Les Citoyens de l’Europe’ (Citizens of Europe) to educate and mobilise Europeans in the "A tree for Greece" campaign. The action is supported by civil engagement group ‘L'élan Nouveau des Citoyens’ (Citizens' New Enthusiasm), UNESCO, and many dignitaries including former Tour de France director Jean-Marie Leblanc, facilitators Nikos Aliagas and Stephane Bern, the president of the Museum of Natural History in Athens Niki Goulandris, Deputy Greek Foreign Minister Theodoros Kassimis - the list goes on. For the five young cyclists preparing to cross Belgium, Luxembourg, Germany, Austria and Italy - a total journey of 1100 miles - this commitment is a way of showing, by way of a small gesture, that a European fraternity among its citizens can be realised. "We will strive for a citizens' Europe united around the ideas of a readiness to help and solidarity", they write.

"Supporting the ideal of European brotherhood through the concrete and the symbolic"

After a journey lasting several weeks and the enthusiasm of the people they encountered along the route, 'Les Citoyens de l'Europe' in conjunction with 'L'élan nouveau des citoyens' launched 'an appeal to the European fraternity' on June 30th. Just a few hours before the start of the French presidency of the European Union, they announced their willingness "to do everything necessary to ensure the first congress of the European brotherhood takes place in Athens next year". Upon their successful arrival they were greeted by the Mayor of Olympia and Niki Goulandris, with messages of support also sent from the president of the Hellenic Republic Karolos Papoulias, the European Commissioner for the Environment Stavros Dimas, and the Director General of UNESCO Koichiro Matsuura. They were also met with broad media coverage.

The citizens' initiative has gained widespread recognition and respect, even getting attention beyond Greek borders. I close with the words of Stavros Dimas: "I welcome and support your initiative (...) By acting together in a movement of solidarity, we can better assist and protect our citizens and our environment. Europe will be stronger by combining our approaches and our capabilities".

The never ending dispute between Strasbourg and Brussels

Babel Strasbourg — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 14:19:00 +0100

By Kerstin Acker
Translation by Andrew Kimpson
Without a doubt the city of Strasbourg is where Europe’s heart beats and where the spirit of Europe took it roots.

But does the city rightly bear the title of the capital of Europe ? The protest is growing and is becoming especially loud in regard to keeping the European Parliament in Strasbourg. Should everything in the future only take place in Brussels? The number of petitions is growing daily and the protest is gathering pace.

The opposition is biding its time to react. But it does exist. With the backing of MEP Briggite Fouré (PPE-DE) and leadership of Pierre Savreux and Fabrice Hinschberger, the organisation “One City” has been founded. They aim to make sure all central offices of the European Parliament (administration, commissions, meetings) are to be held in Strasbourg.

It is unclear whether the initiative will be successful in silencing the protests.

Nevertheless, it is an appropriate response to the petition submitted by Margot Wallström which called for the European Parliament headquarters to be in Brussels. More information and support forms for the initiative can be found on the website One City and in the Facebook-group.

This petition is aimed at the wider public

With the title ‘Strasbourg has been made the victim of Experiment Hold Up for many years’, the founders of the organisation “One City”, Pierre Savreux und Fabrice Hinschberger, have circulated a petition aiming to get signatures of European citizens.

The aim of the petition: to uphold the agreement for staging sessions of the European Parliament solely in Strasbourg. It will require at least one million signatures before the petition can be brought before the European Parliament and be considered.

The organisation’s arguments for the parliamentary seat are simple but clear: “Strasbourg embodies a certain conception of Europe: a Europe for the people, a Europe of democracy, a Europe for human rights. And when the world takes a look at Europe, it looks at Strasbourg and not at Brussels!”, as stated by Pierre Savreux. “If the European Parliament leaves Strasbourg, Europe will lose what it currently represents, what makes it attractive and what it is. And that just can’t be allowed to happen” added Fabrice Hinschberger. They are convinced that this petition is essential if these “underhand attacks coming out of Brussels are to be brought to an end.”

“Strasbourg is the heart of the European Union”

In an institutional sense Strasbourg is the capital of Europe, since it is the home of the European Parliament, the Council of Europe and the European Court of Human Rights. The city plays a vital role within European communications and follows a modern understanding of democracy and human rights. In addition, Strasbourg is a city with a unique history; the symbol of Franco-German reconciliation. What other city can say that it has changed its “nationality” four times in the last century alone?

"We are not against Brussels, but we must recognise the heart of Europe and that its 27, one day perhaps 33, countries must return to its birthplace. And this is in Strasbourg, thanks to the Franco-German reconciliation”, reaffirmed Savreux.

If the petition is successful and the aim of bringing a single seat of parliament to Strasbourg is achieved, many things would be much clearer and simpler. The organisation wants a “modernisation of dialogue at the centre of the three institutions, to ensure the synergy between and necessary controls of the Commission, Council and Parliament.” This would make possible the use of video conferencing or the permanent presence of the Commission and the European Council in Strasbourg.

Not least, it should be remembered that if all institutions of the European Union were to come together in Strasbourg, it would enable the Parliament to become an EU institution to which all citizens of the European Union could identify, since they would recognise Strasbourg as the capital and heartbeat of Europe. “Nobody challenges Frankfurt as the location for the European Central Bank, for example, or the status of Brussels as the European executive and the same goes for Luxemburg! Why should Strasbourg’s status be called into question?!” reply both leaders of the organisation unanimously.

At the same time, they hope to profit from the French Presidency of the EU, so that their demands may be heard. “This is the opportunity we need to put the debate under the media spotlight!”

Faced with a Europe that currently seems to be getting more technocratic, Strasbourg presents a good alternative and an opportunity to bring the people of Europe closer together, “especially after negative election results concerning the new constitutional plans and the Lisbon Treaty… Strasbourg embodies all the positives of Europe, it stands for reconciliation and a new start and offers Europe the footing it needs.

All interested European citizens are invited to sign the petition, which will be presented to the European Parliaments Petitions Commission. The organisation hopes to find the necessary support that will give more weight to their argument. Discussions have so far mostly been lead by Catherine Trautmann (EP, PSE, FR) and Bernd Posselt (PE, PPE-DE, DE) on a trans-political and international level.

The organisation is currently limited to parliamentary action. Nevertheless, a press conference has been arranged to inform all citizens about the initiative.

Roland Ries: We must respect the treaties

Babel Strasbourg — Sat, 08 Nov 2008 09:00:00 +0100

Strasbourg, 24 September 2008

By Vincent Lebrou
Translated by Katherine Short

Strasbourg, through the mouthpiece of Roland Ries, has quickly fought back following a written statement by the anti Strasbourg camp in the European Parliament which adocated the removal of the European Parliament from Strasbourg.

Just one seat? That’s fine – but have it in Strasbourg!

Roland Ries recalled the statement made in May 2008 by the Prim3 Minister Francois Fillon who saw the issue as simple “To avoid so many people having to travel between the two places, all you have to do is leave the European Parliament permanently in Strasbourg.”

On 22nd September 2008 Strasbourg’s city council unanimously adopted a motion which urged that “the international treaties, which make our city one of the official seats of the European Parliament, are respected”.

Ries also argued that if the seat of the European Parliament is put into question then the locations of the seats of all European institutions need to be re-examined. His views were fully supported by the European representative Jean-Marie Beaupuy. “The actual question that needs to be posed concerns the function of all European institutions.” (Les Dernières Nouvelles d'Alsace, 3rd September 2008). Strasbourg’s mayor also argued that “with modern communications technology, all supranational institutions do not have to be located within the same city. South Africa is a prime example, whereby the Parliament is a two hour flight from the seat of the government”.

Members that signed the contract recognised the “significant efforts to accommodate the European institution". In the Ries' eyes, no compensation could ever mitigate the impact of a hypothetical departure of the EU parliament. Beyond the economic impact, Strasbourg features strongly in the public imagination as a symbol of democracy and European unity.

It is in Strasbourg where the greater Europe of the Council of Europe and the European Union meets. In Strasbourg lies the heart of continental parliamentary democracy which guarantees democracy and human rights.

(Photo: flickr/PizzaDeBarr)

We need to stop being defensive and show what Strasbourg can bring to Europe

Babel Strasbourg — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 09:00:00 +0100

Strasbourg, 7 August 2008

By Kerstin Acker
Translated by Katherine Short

The mayor of Strasbourg, Roland Ries, spoke in the European Parliament on 8th July about the Strasbourg agenda for the French EU presidency.

He was welcomed by the SPE (Social Democratic Party of Europe) MEP Catherine Trautmann. The former mayor of Strasbourg (1989-2001) did not miss the opportunity to mention the difficulties that the French EU presidency is faced with. She spoke in great detail about the climate crisis which the French presidency has set itself as one of its four published top priorities.

Ronald Ries expressed his hopes that the French Presidency will bring two key issues to the central stage so that the French Presidency attunes itself to Europe.

A long term strategy for Europe in Strasbourg

“We need to first resolve a problem that has been ignored for a long time and has led to endless misunderstandings" said Ronald Ries as he began his talk concerning the heated debate surrounding the location of the headquarters of the European Parliament in Strasbourg. The main bone of contention is the idea of a single seat in Europe and the accusation that Strasbourg is not the most accessible city. In any case, “accessibility is no longer a problem” noted Ries “With the extension of the TGV East (high-speed rail) track, accessibility has vastly improved".

"Strasbourg is the headquarters of a certain conception of Europe. Strasbourg is the People’s Europe, the parliamentary Europe and the Europe of human rights. In contrast, however, there is a completely different concept of Europe that is currently in crisis. Recently a gap has developed between this idea of what Europe is and how it is seen by the citizens of Europe, shown by the recent election results in France, The Netherlands and Ireland".

A little gentler, Ries added “we must stop being so defensive and show what Strasbourg can really offer Europe. We need to come from Europe to Strasbourg, so that Strasbourg can come to Europe”.

A chance to enlarge the European District of Strasbourg –Ortenau

Ronald Ries used the opportunity to bring the most important points of his campaign back into the media spotlight, namely the advancement of the project concerning the Euro district of Strasbourg-Ortenau.

“Strasbourg is the seat of Europe, with a parliament of 27 member states, the Council of Europe with its 47 states and the European Court of Human Rights. The difference between the Europe in Strasbourg and Strasbourg’s Europe is currently especially visible. In this respect, we hope from the bottom of our hearts that we can develop a proper European district and a real partnership on both sides of the Rhein.” Ries expressed his hopes that while the European district of Strasbourg-Ortenau is currently limited to a cross border cooperation zone, it could become a truly European district where the people can gain a true idea of Europe.

The 4 key areas of the Euro district project are the recognition of Agenda 21 (concerning sustainable development) on a cross-border level, improvement of the social and economic attractiveness of the area, the creation of a common cultural space and finally to make Strasbourg and the Ortenau district a shining example for Europe and the whole world.

“The aim is to find a special legal and tax status so that Strasbourg is allowed to be able to properly fulfil its role within Europe and to allow it to take on an international dimension which up to now has been problematic” explained Strasbourg’s mayor.

To ensure that citizens are able to participate in the development of the Euro district, Ries is expecting a referendum to be held which will make clear the expectations of the citizens on both sides of the border. This consultation assessing the citizens' approval of the project will be run parallel to the European elections in 2009.

A programme aimed at its citizens

In the past six months ministerial meetings have not been held within the Alsace (Alsatian) capital and Strasbourg has had to adapt its programmes accordingly. “I know that Strasbourg is not the only city in France. However, I am of the opinion that if we want to strengthen the European and International reputation of our city it is worthwhile holding our meetings here rather then in towns like Brest or Marseille. These are cities that do not hold an equivalent reputation in Europe like Strasbourg.”

For a long time European representatives have not been welcome in Strasbourg and so the city has decided to increase the appeal of the Europe to the residents of the region. “We wanted to involve citizens in the French EU Presidency in Strasbourg. For this reason, we have planned a series of free events for the general public”.

After the food festival, which will be held from the 10th to the 13th July 2008, there will be even more cultural, culinary and European events all over city. In the heart of the city, in Kleber Square, there will be an ongoing event, until 30th August, so that the citizens will become used to the idea of Europe. Up until the 31st August, the most famous, historical building in the city, the Cathedral, will be illuminated along side musical accompaniments under the motto “Europe since 1900”.

But will these events be enough to make Strasbourg’s population pay attention to what is going on in France in the next six months? One thing is certain, “Strasbourg is prepared for the French Presidency”, confirmed Ronald Ries with confidence.

The Georgians mobilise themselves in Strasbourg

Babel Strasbourg — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 09:00:00 +0100

Strasbourg, 13 August 2008

By Lucie Dupin and Gabriela Kukuckova
Translated by Andrew Kimpson

Ossetia is located in a mountainous region and is inhabited by Georgians. As the Soviet Union collapsed in 1992 Georgia broke away from Russia, whereas the South Ossetian separatists declared their independence from Georgia and in doing so expressed their desire to be affiliated with the Russian Federation. From then on there has always been tension and conflict. The situation escalated on the 7th of August when two Georgian soldiers were supposedly killed and three were badly injured in the Ossetia region. So far there have been no independent reports on the incident. The Georgians reacted promptly with extensive air and ground assaults as they sought to “protect the sovereignty of the country.”

On the 8th of August the Russians intervened in the conflict. Prime Minister Vladimir Putin called for a counter-strike against Georgia, effectively declaring war. Russian President Dimitri Medvedev indicated that the murder of his fellow countrymen would not be allowed to go unpunished. Russia then sent tanks to South Ossetia in order to provide support to the separatists. Even the Russian air force has engaged itself and begun numerous air raids outside the Ossetia region. Georgia in turn has accused Russia of invading its territory and targeting an oil pipeline that reaches from Asia to Europe. On 12th August the Russians received orders to withdraw from the South Ossetia region. During EU President Sarkozy’s visit to the crisis region, a peace treaty would be negotiated, which could be accepted by both parties. In the meantime, however, the situation remains tense. As the opposing forces continued to threaten each other, the fighting carried on. Café Babel Strasbourg met a number of Georgian demonstrators who have become active since the start of the conflict.

Since the conflict began Georgians from Strasbourg and the Alsace region have expressed support for their country in front of the Council of Europe. Posters, flyers and speeches made by the movement have given out the message that Georgians in France are prepared to fight their cause. One young Georgian, full of enthusiasm, confirmed this; she stated the pacifist intentions of the gathering in front of the consulate in Strasbourg, situated in the heart of Europe. The number of Georgians participating in the demonstration has grown to over 60 in a short space of time. Those sympathetic to the Georgian cause have also joined the students and workers of Georgian origin in commemoration of families left behind and those who had taken vacation there shortly before the conflict broke out. The protests in public spaces have aimed to make passers-by aware of what is at stake in this conflict. While some written statements regarding the current situation have been distributed, large red and white posters have also been put up. Some timid car horns sounded their approval from the streets surrounding the EU institution. On the part of the members of the Georgian consulate, the support appeared to be much more pronounced. The young demonstrators said that updates on the situation were regularly delivered to them. The latest news at this time; a peace plan has been created, which will be supported by the EU. However, this will not be able to mislead the demonstration’s leaders. They will not be ready to leave their posts just yet. Quite on the contrary, they are prepared to continue with their presence on the streets of Strasbourg until the situation settles and the conflict can be brought to a peaceful conclusion.

European company Eutelsat keeps China in the dark

Babel Strasbourg — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 10:37:00 +0100

European Parliament, Strasbourg, 22nd october

By Rob Compton

The EU is urged to put pressure on the French-owned satellite operator Eutelsat who dropped the uncensored, US-based, Chinese news channel NTDTV in a politically-motivated move in June.

Protestors met EMPs arriving at the European Parliament in Strasbourg on Wednesday where a group headed by German MEP Helga Trüpel, a member of The Greens / European Free Aliance, is calling for the parliament to put pressure on the French satellite operator Eutelsat to reinstate the signal of US-based Chinese news service NTDTV in China.

Protests at the EU institutions have remained a relatively rare sight with many people feeling they would be unable to affect change by protesting at a national level, let alone at the EU. Despite atrocious weather conditions the group protested all day, handing out leaflets and talking with people. This is perhaps some measure of the feelings raised by the dropping of the channel and a sign that the protestors believe that it is the EU who will help them and not individual member states.

Eutelsat has cited a lack of bandwidth due to a technical failure on its satellite W5 as the reason for dropping the network. However, recent investigations by Reporters Without Borders have shown the move to have been premeditated and politically-motivated. In a telephone conversation between a Eutelsat employee and a person they thought to be a Chinese propaganda official the employee said, “It was our company's CEO in France who decided to stop NTDTV's signal. (...) It was because we got repeated complaints and reminders from the Chinese government. (...) We will just use technical reasons to tell them (NTDTV) that we cannot turn it on for you”.

The US-based channel had previously reported on the tainted milk scandal, events in Tibet and the disproportionate number of deaths of school children due to unreliable construction methods in the Sichuan earthquake. Limits on freedom of the press are widespread in China leading to NTDTV having been described as the 'only Chinese TV network to tell the truth'. Even foreign news sources are heavily censored by the Chinese authorities with TV screens reportedly 'going blank' whenever a story deemed unsuitable is reported upon.

These limits on the press don't merely lead to people having a skewed view of the regime but have a direct impact on lives. In a press conference at the Strasbourg parliament on Wednesday, NTDTV's European correspondent, Yiyuan Zhou, took the milk scandal as an example: “The case became apparent a week before the Olympics. If our signal had not been cut off (...) more people could have been made aware of this disaster and fewer babies could have suffered kidney stones”.

A worldwide impact

We should bear in mind that it is not just China that is affected by their press censorship. The SARS outbreak in 2003 became an issue that affected the international community. According to figures from the World Heath Organisation SARS caused 44 deaths in Canada, numerous cases across Europe including one death in France. Although China was worst affected with more than 5000 cases and 349 deaths, speculation abounds that the authorities knew of the problems months before making them public thus delaying any response to the outbreak and the prevention of further deaths.

The regime’s censorship directly led to preventable deaths not only in China but abroad as well. It is thoroughly unacceptable for a European company to partake in this and the serious implications of their actions must be made very clear to them and their shareholders.

European Football: a time for expansion?

Babel Strasbourg — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 09:00:00 +0100

Strasbourg, 21 May 2008

By Jean-Baptiste Mathieu
Translated by Andrew Kimpson

Wednesday 21st May at the Luzhniki Stadium in Moscow.
The final finds its place in history even before kick-off.

On Wednesday 21st May the final of the Champions League took place in Moscow’s Luzhniki Stadium. For the majority of European football fans this was a particularly fascinating due to this being the first time two English teams – Chelsea and Manchester United – have met at such a high level. However, the historical importance of the game lay somewhere totally different. For the first time the final of the most important competition in European football took place in an Eastern European country. With the exception of Belgrade in 1978, a final of the European Cup or Champions League has never been held further east than Vienna. (1)

In this competition in which Italian, English and Spanish clubs take centre stage, European football fans have got used to the fact that Eastern European countries, with the exception of the 1998/99 Season, appear to have systematically failed for many years. The image of Eastern European football has suffered due to this absence of more than 15 years. In a history in which only the victorious are remembered, Eastern Europe sinks more and more into oblivion. However, it was the countries of Eastern Europe that made the European Cup a thing of legend. We only have to think back to the second leg of the quarter final between St. Etienne and Dynamo Kiev on 17th March 1976. St. Etienne, who had lost 2:0 in Kiev, were able to claw back the deficit in 90 minutes. Then, despite a calf injury, Dominique Rocheteau secured the French team’s qualification in the 112th minute during extra-time.

In the period between the 1960s and 1990s, the teams on the other side of the Iron Curtain ware able to enjoy growing success. Even by 1955 two Eastern European teams – Gwardia Warszaw and Voros Lobogo – were receiving great praise from French sport magazine L’equipe (2). The early years proved to be difficult: Real Madrid were somewhat pre-eminent, with over 100,000 supporters watching the finals and no Eastern European club progressing further than the quarter-finals. It was not until the 1964/65 Season when Hungarian club FC Gyori Eto made it to the semi-final. From then on it really took off. During the seasons between 1966 and 1970, CSKA Sofia, FC Marila Pribram, Spartak Tinava and Legia Warsaw all became part of the four best teams in Europe one after the other. In the following decade, both FC Ujpest and Dynamo Kiev reached the semi-final.

The 1980s were then a golden age for Eastern European football. Excluding the 1980/81, 1984/85 and 1989/90 Seasons at least one Eastern European club made it to the semi-finals, with the climax coming in the 1986 Final held in Seville’s Sanchez Pizjuan Stadium. The year after the Heysel Disaster in 1985 all English clubs were banned from competing in Europe. FC Barcelona were picked as favourites to beat Steaua Bucharest. But after 120 minutes without score the Romanian goalkeeper Helmuth Duckadem saved all of Barcelona’s penalties. In front of the Barca goal Marcus Lacatus and Gavril Balint were able to show their ability and made their penalties count. The trophy headed to Romania. In the 1988/89 Season the team from Bucharest once again reached the final, this time against AC Milan, played at Barcelona’s Nou Camp. The Rossoneri demolished the Romanian defence: Ruud Gullit and Marco van Basten grabbing two goals each as Milan won 4:0. by the end of the 1980s Steaua Bucharest had made it to the semi-finals three times, whereas Dynamo Bucharest, CSKA Sofia, Widzew Lodz and Dynamo Kiev getting there once each.

The 1990s then marked a turning point. Apart from the 1998/99 season, the semi-finals of Europe’s most important competition took place without the presence of Eastern European countries. Spartak Moscow collapsed just before the final in that season against Olympic Marseille, viewed by experts as the best team in Europe. Marseille beat Spartak, but lost the final on penalties against Red Star Belgrade in Bari.

The form of the competition changed in 1993. The European Cup was transformed into the Champions League and this lead to a task that was now much more demanding for Eastern European Clubs. The direct knock-out elimination was abolished in favour of group qualification format, in which in which every team not placed at the top of the UEFA rankings had to play several preliminary rounds. This meant Easter European clubs were impeded entry to the top table of the competition. Today only the winner of the Russian league is guaranteed a place in the closing stages of the Champions League. The other Eastern European clubs must firstly progress through one, two or even three preliminary qualifying rounds before they may face the winners of third largest championship. In the period between 1991 and 2008 only one team managed to reach the semi-final. Dynamo Kiev, lead by Andriy Shevchenko, were beaten by Bayern Munich, who themselves would go on to lose what seemed to be a promising finale against Manchester United on a thrilling night in Barcelona.

Today there are two possible solutions to an imbalanced relationship between clubs from West and Eastern Europe. Firstly the promotion of one or two Eastern European clubs into elite teams in the form of Chelsea. Russian football is showing signs of achieving this with its major club and current holder of the UEFA Cup, Zenith St. Petersburg. The second option is a reformation of the Champions League by changing the participation requirements of the champions from countries outside of the top ten UEFA rankings. Michel Platini, the UEFA president wants to proceed with such a project. However, this may be difficult to implement.

In the meantime, the fact that finals of European competitions are being held in Eastern Europe, with the European Championship itself taking place in Poland and the Ukraine in 2012, can be used as a reminder that football is also loved east of Vienna.

(1) The history and style of football in the Balkans is not the same as that of Russia, Poland, Ukraine or Romania. It is therefore important not to tar the former Yougoslavia and its neighbours with the same brush as the Eastern European countries.
(2) The French sport magazine L’Equipe organised the first Champions League.

(Photo: flickr/lordah)

UN High Representative for the Alliance of Civilisations addresses the European Parliament

Babel Strasbourg — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 10:14:00 +0100

European Parliament, Strasbourg, 22nd October

By Katherine Short

Jorge Sampaio, UN High Representative for the Alliance of Civilizations, addressed the European Parliament on Wednesday 22nd October. The Alliance of Civilizations was launched by the governments of Spain and Turkey under the auspices of the United Nations with the support of the then incumbent UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan in 2005. It states its aims as “to improve understanding and cooperative relations among nations and peoples across cultures and religions and, in the process, to help counter the forces that fuel polarization and extremism.” Sampaio, former President of Portugal, was appointed in 2007 by Ban Ki Moon, the UN Secretary General, as the High Level Representative with the mandate to fulfil the Implementation Plan of the Alliance of Civilizations.

Sampaio opened his address with a message from the Ban Ki Moon. The message spoke of the challenges that Europe faces in its task of promoting intercultural dialogue and urged the European Parliament to continue to fight against religious fundamentalism and intolerance and spoke of the need to pursue educational projects. He highlighted how Europe, with a history of conflicts often arising from prejudice and intolerance, has a particular role to play in the promotion of interfaith dialogue. Furthermore, Europe’s location within the world and the diversity within it “makes Europe an important bridge between civilisations”. He concluded his message by stating that “cross-cultural tolerance, dialogue, respect and understanding must be pillars of the better world we are trying to build”.

European values and identity

The Alliance of Civilisations was formed out of the need to prevent a “clash of civilisations”, a controversial phrase coined by the political scientist Samuel Huntington, who argued that in the post Cold War world religion and culture would develop into the primary source of conflict. In his speech, Sampaio noted the growing hostile divide between Western and Muslim culture, in particular with regard to the way the cultures perceive one another. He spoke of “religion being employed as a tool by all and sundry, and used and abused for various purposes and efforts” and expressed his belief that the polarisation of communities will only serve in giving rise to extremism. Sampaio questioned how to integrate the Muslims of Europe and expressed his opinion that new policies need to be introduced not only by the European Parliament and its subsidiary bodies but also by national and local governments. He also highlighted the urgent need for the European Union to establish a collective identity between its citizens, quite rightly arguing that the cultural diversity of Europe should be celebrated rather than being seen as a source of conflict and tension.

Sampaio’s speech comes at a key point in time for the European Union and follows an address made by Pakistani human rights lawyer, Asma Jahangir, in June which also emphasised the importance of intercultural understanding and dialogue. The European Union has declared 2008 the European Year of Intercultural Dialogue. It is a year which will attempt to create dialogue and cooperation among religions and cultures and will celebrate the diversity of Europe. Sampaio praised the introduction of the European Year of Intercultural Dialogue but argued that one year is not sufficient to ensure Europe is a continent consisting of respect and tolerance. He expressed his hopes that the year be expanded into a permanent project which would promote diversity. “We cannot allow present emergencies to deflect us from handling the in-depth problems of today and guard against the catastrophes of tomorrow”.

Value of Education

Sampaio spoke of the value of education about human rights and of the need to incorporate education about faith into governmental policies to guarantee intercultural competences. Furthermore, he argued that in order to create and successfully promote an intercultural dialogue there needs to be a shift in the mind set of European communities. Sampaio's speech was followed by a press conference with Sampairo and Hans-Gert Pöttering, President of the European Parliament who stated that “to immigration belongs the words integration”. It is vitally important that such integration policies need to be incorporated into education in schools throughout Europe.

Relieving intercultural tensions

Turkey, alongside Spain, was the driving force behind the establishment of the Alliance of Civilisations. At the press conference Hans-Gert Pöttering highlighted the essential presence of Turkey in the EU, noting Turkey’s commitment to intercultural dialogue and that the next forum of the Alliance will be held in Istanbul on the 2nd and 3rd April 2009. However, he went against the common European Union view that Turkey could, and indeed should, join the European Union if it accepted the common values of Europe. He instead showed a preference for a “privileged partnership” arguing that the inclusion of the Turkey would be too great a challenge for the European Union.

“If I were to do it all over again, I would begin with culture” argued Jean Monnet, who was one of the main architects of the idea of European integration. These words were articulated by the UN Secretary General in Sampaio’s speech. The facilitation of joint initiatives between the Alliance of the Civilisations and the European Union is something to be welcomed and the cultural diversity of Europe needs to be celebrated rather than being seen as a source of potential conflict. However, it is not enough to leave such projects to the international level, they also need to be instigated at a local level among civil society.

The European Year of Intercultural Dialogue is vitally important in ensuring the maintenance of peace in Europe. After all, in the words of Sampaio, “this is about democracy, rule of law, human rights and respect for cultural diversity”

(Photo:flickr/wehavekaosinthegarden)

Asma Jahangir: Interfaith dialogue to promote respect, tolerance and understanding

Babel Strasbourg — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 09:00:00 +0100

Strasbourg, 19 June 2008

By Lena Morel
Translated by Katherine Short

Pakistani Human Rights Lawyer and founder of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, Asma Jahangir, was a guest at the European Parliament on the 19th June 2008, where she gave a talk on the European Year of Intercultural Dialogue. The UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief is not unknown within the European Parliament; The parliament voted last year to demand her immediate release when she was imprisoned in Pakistan.

Jahangir referred to the need to expand the language of intercultural dialogue to include aspects of religion and interfaith issues, which affects both believers and non believers. She further asserted that every individual must respect the universality of human rights.

Intercultural Dialogue: What, Who, Why and How?

“Does intercultural also incorporate interfaith dialogue?” I am of the opinion that they clearly are. Undoubtedly religion is a part of culture and interfaith tensions need to be taken into account. Therefore, intercultural dialogue must also take into account different communities and their ideas.”

Jahangir’s remarks are courageous in view of the current distrust surrounding different religions. Especially as her suggestions extends to the political field in which, in her opinion, governments and civil society need to work together to guarantee an effective interaction between all religions. Interfaith dialogue, which will be handled at the most fundamental level of society, will also benefit the women that often are at the heart of the tensions and yet too often are marginalised.

The human rights lawyer has welcomed the initiatives and aims of the European Union (European Parliament and the Council of Europe) as part of the European Year of Intercultural Dialogue. “Together in Diversity” is the motto of this initiative which was launched on the 4th December 2007 by the European Commission. It aims to promote cultural diversity and at the same time strengthening the sense of belonging to the European Union. “Intercultural dialogue can counteract sectarian and ostracising attitudes and guarantee world-wide religious tolerance, respect and understanding… It is important to highlight the contribution of different cultural influences in the heritage and ways of life of member states and to recognise that the cultural and intercultural dialogue is indispensable for a harmonious cohabitation” explained Jahangir.

Education as a preventative tool

“Education and intercultural dialogue constitute an important means to prevent misunderstandings, conflict and breaches of freedom of belief and religion.”

Education is the touch stone for the interfaith process advocated by Jahangir. In this respect, she praises EU educational programmes, such as Comenius, Erasmus, Leonardo Da Vinci and Grundtvig.

The aim of interfaith dialogue is to bring people together; People who will then build bridges between communities and thus strengthening human rights. Jahangir appealed not only to leaders of the religious communities (the last time that these religious and spiritual leaders met was in 2000 at The Millennium World Peace Summit in New York) but also artists (such as Daniel Barenboim and the Eastern Divan Orchestra. ) "Artists play an important role in the education in religious tolerance and building bridges between different communities", asserted Jahangir.

The media also plays a role within this educational process. "Here are the real successes of interfaith dialogue... and we do not need to do much to have a constructive dialogue“. Jahangir cites the initatives taken the initiatives recently taken in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories and in Belfast, in Northern Ireland, "however, these efforts rarely make the headlines, unlike religiously motivated violence."

Jahangir’s speech was applauded by the European representatives. She concluded her speech by emphasising once more the necessity of intercultural and interfaith dialogue and quoted the former UN Secretary General, Boutros Boutros Ghali, "Human rights, viewed at the universal level, bring us face-to-face with the most challenging dialectical conflict ever: between "identity" and "otherness", between the "myself" and "others". They teach us in a direct, straightforward manner that we are at the same time identical and different."

(Photo : European Year of Intercultural Dialogue)

Promotion of multilingualism in Europe

Babel Strasbourg — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 09:00:00 +0100

The Babel link on Monday (23 June)

Translated by Katherine Short

2.4 Euros per year, per capita, in total 1 billion Euros annually or 1% of the EU budget. That is the budget that the EU has granted the European Commissioner for Multilingualism, who, since the expansions of 2004 and 2007, is responsible for the management of 23 national languages.

“A rewarding challenge”

At the request of José Manuel Borrosos, the chairman of the European Commission, and Leonard Orban, the Commissioner for Multilingualism, a group consisting of intellectuals under the leadership of the author Amin Maalouf has been formed. They have been given the task to discuss “the contribution of multilingualism to intercultural dialogue and mutual understanding of citizens in the EU”. The group consists of, amongst others, the Director of the Goethe Institute Jutta Limback, the author Tahar Ben Jelloun and the philosopher and former minister for education in the Czech Republic Jan Sokol. The result of this information exchange is a report with the title “A Rewarding Challenge: How the multiplicity of languages could strengthen Europe”.

The report begins with a warning: “Needless to say, language diversity entails constraints; it weighs on the running of the European Institutions and has its cost in terms of money and time. This cost could even become prohibitive if we wanted to give dozens of languages the rightful place which their speakers could legitimately wish for.” Furthermore, the report examines the risk of the decline of multilingualism in European Institutions. “Against this background, there is therefore a strong temptation to tolerate a de facto situation in which a single language, English, would be dominant in the work of the European Institutions, in which two or three other languages would more or less manage to hold their own for a little longer, while the vast majority of our languages would have but a symbolic status and would hardly ever be used in joint meetings.”

Such a development was not desirable to the group of intellectuals. “It would be damaging to the economic and strategic interests of our continent and all our citizens irrespective of their mother tongue. It would also be contrary to the whole ethos of the European project, in more ways than one.”

Permanently establish the language diversity in Europe

The report, which has the aim of preserving the linguistic diversity of Europe as a basis of European identity, delivers a few pioneering proposals for the next few years. The suggestions concentrate on two main ideas. “The bilateral relations between the peoples of the European Union should hinge by way of priority on the languages of the two peoples involved rather than on another language. This means that every European language should have, in each of the countries of the European Union, a substantial group of proficient and highly motivated speakers.” More precisely, “every European should be encouraged to freely choose a distinctive language, different from his or her language of identity, and also different from his or her language of international communication”.

The clear aim is to motivate people to learn languages. “By drawing a clear distinction, when the choice is made, between a language of international communication and a personal adoptive language, we would encourage Europeans to take two separate decisions when it comes to language learning, one dictated by the needs of the broadest possible communication, and the other guided by a whole host of personal reasons stemming from individual or family background, emotional ties, professional interest, cultural preferences, intellectual curiosity, to name but a few.”

Europe is based precisely upon this diversity and the intellectual group expressed the following opinion “To neglect a language is to run the risk of seeing its speakers becoming disenchanted with the European project. People cannot be expected to be wholeheartedly behind Europe unless they feel that their specific culture, and primarily their language, is fully respected and that the integration of their country in the European Union contributes to the flourishing of their language and culture rather than marginalising them.”

The report has been met with different responses

The report was submitted to the Ministers of Education of the EU Member States at a conference on the 13th February entitled “Promoting Multilingualism: a shared commitment“, which was organised by the Slovenian Presidency. The response was mixed: Some ministers saw the idea as utopian while others wanted to first concentrate on current initiatives.

Last September the European Commission has published a report on the theme of multilingualism.

(Photo : flickr/ Stephanieannemarie)

Claude Truchot: “Europe has to be multilingual!”

Babel Strasbourg — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 09:00:00 +0100

Strasbourg, July 1st, 2008

By Vincent Lebrou
Translation by Géraldine Guérin

Claude Truchot is a specialist of language issues in the European expansion, renowned professor at Marc Bloch University, Strasbourg, France. For Babel Strasbourg, he analyses the recent evolutions of the interactions between languages in Europe.

Amin Maaloof recently presided at an intellectual group whose report recommends the concept of the adoptive native language. This report would like that the teaching of this second adoptive language is favored, not to be only limited to English. Do you think this concept is useful ?

Indeed, the important concept in the Maaloof report for me is that other languages should be included, as people would have to know, learn and practice English sooner or later. We could include other languages closer to us than English is, as English is often more a tool or a travel language than a native language. This approach, which consists in favoring a closer language, could be a good alternative. But is it realistic? It could be if political players make this choice. Unfortunately, their choices are usually driven by economical imperatives or electoral pressure. Currently, English is strongly requested. We would need to convince people that learning English, as a first foreign language is not the best choice. At this point, political players can intervene to explain the different options. Maybe promoting a strong concept such as the adoptive native language could help.

In your opinion, why a multilingual Europe – which in any case will not function only in English – is required?

You need to understand a key point: up to now, the European expansion has worked based on a principle which can be qualified as one of subsidiary status:

there are institutions, and also countries which function by strongly articulating their actions with the ones of the institutions. It is difficult to imagine that the countries, which make decisions in The Council of Europe, could initiate the European agreements if everything was done in this unique language. Such a process can only be made in the country’s own language! Let’s take an example, still relevant today. Currently, the constitution project is being ratified. But political debates on this constitutional project do not take place in English. These debates take place in the language of each country. In Ireland, they take place in English and also in the UK but not in France, or in the Czech Republic or elsewhere.  National parliaments deliberate and decide in the country’s native language. Furthermore, if the ratification is made by referendum, debates will of course take place in each country’s language. The directives themselves are country directed and are initiated in each country in their own language. I do not see how they could be initiated in a foreign language. Hence, this discussion between the institutions, which proceed with a limited number of languages, and the countries, which can only function in their own language(s), needs to exist. Otherwise the European expansion could not advance. For this reason, the European expansion has to be multilingual. It is the sine qua non condition of the functioning of the European Union!

In some way, we are returning to Mr. Maalouf’s report: he would like bilateral relationships between two countries to occur not in English, but in the languages of the concerned countries. Do you have same idea ?

To favor the languages of the partners instead of a vehicular language is an attitude to adopt! It is not easy for people to accept such a concept, because in people’s mind, having relationships with another language speaker requires a vehicular language. It is not true at all, at the level of the individuals as well as at the level of the institutions. Let me give you a small example, indeed anecdotal but very revealing: outside of Café Babel, I surf on other websites, and not very long ago, I found a French forum concerning the defeat of France during the European football championship. People from different nationalities, including Italians, were participating on this website. One of the Italians made a comment about the French defeat in very poor English, almost gibberish. I could not help thinking that this Italian did not need to write in English. If he could not speak French, then he could just have written in Italian. For a French speaker, it is not very difficult to understand written Italian. Usually written conversation, something sent by email, is quite easy to understand. Here, we are entering a communication mode that people do not understand, which does not come to mind immediately, but which is fundamental. When two people speak close languages, it is easier if each uses their own language, and with some practice, they will end up understanding each other. Similarly, it will not be very difficult to speak the other person’s language. It is easier to communicate in Italian for French speakers and in French for Italian speakers, than to communicate in English, which is not such an easy language in which to communicate.

Not as easy as people think or say.

In reality, it depends on the level. English can appear to be quite simple, because of the grammar. I will not enter into linguistic details, but the grammar does not comport declinations like German, and other things like this. Sentence structures are similar to French, so people think it is easy, but in reality it is a very difficult language. It is even more difficult for French speakers, as it comports lot of words of Latin origin, which do not correspond to French words, and it is very easy to make a mistake!

Can respect and promotion of the linguistic diversity constitute sine qua non conditions for the raising of a real European identity?

There is a very strong implantation of languages in Europe nowadays, notably national languages. On the contrary, other languages are dying, in particular regional ones, which does not mean that people are not attached to them; on the contrary, there is a strong attachment to dialects, but it tends to be affective and it corresponds less and less to use. On the opposite, national languages are extremely well implanted and widely used, and I think that, for the vast majority, these are native languages and people are attached to them. This is the reality of Europe. The attachment of people to their own language, which seems quite understandable to me, should not transform to nationalism, it should not become an excuse for exclusion. We could cultivate the affection, the interest for a language while still being open to other ones languages. Making the effort to speak to someone in his language is a sign of openness and acceptance I think one is a lot more closed minded to the other one when one only wants to communicate in a vehicular language. When one only wants to speak in their own language, it is a sign of closemindedness. I think that it is essential to try to speak in one other language and trying to speak several languages. Being multilingual is a way of being open. Only speaking native language and English is not being open. When you speak English at work, it becomes a communication tool; there is no affective attachment, no symbol of diversity. I think Europe needs to open to diversity, it seems obvious to me. Not only to create a European identity, but also to create an entire European state of mind.

Indeed, should not the particular geographical context in which we are located, Strasbourg, border city, favor this language learning?

It seems to me a necessity that is not always taken into account. Big efforts have been made in Alsace to teach German. On the German side, it has been more difficult; a project has been ongoing for several years with some success. It aims to teach French since primary school, but it has encountered hostility from lots of parents. They think that their kids would be lost if they do not learn English. It is difficult to convince them that it is easier to start with French, as we are located next to the border. Later on, they could move on to English easily, as English is used widely by German neighbors. The difficulty does not really exist, except in peoples mind. Concerning Alsace, we can feel proud of the efforts made to teach German. There is still a loss both from a quantitative and qualitative point of view. 15 to 20 years ago, Alsace was a reservoir of German speakers. A vast percentage of translators and interpreters of the European Union, who translated from and to German, were from Alsace, because they were bilingual. But there are less and less bilingual speakers; families do not learn languages as much. It is worrying.

“It is non-sense to not favor other languages anymore”

At a global level, are foreign languages such as German still attractive enough? We also have to look at things from a more global point of view: there is a dramatic decrease of German studies students in France. Paradoxically, there are not enough people to work in collaboration with the German economics market, although there are lots of opportunities. I know several students in German studies here who found a job quite easily because of their knowledge of German: there is an open market. We act a little foolishly: we want English, but there are lots of demands in other languages. Economically, it is non-sense. Maybe not total non-sense, I do not deny the utility of English, but I think that in terms of public policy, it is non-sense not to favor other languages as well.

Can it lead to political issues? Can speaking several languages, in addition to English, be an advantage in the competitiveness of a sector, of a country?

It is likely, even if it is tough to prove. Studies have been made on this topic. There has been a report showing that the more languages one knows, the more competitive one is. If one cannot speak well enough in certain languages, markets are lost. This argument has been widely used in the United Kingdom, where for the longest time English was the unique language in the business world. Several studies have shown that English people lost markets precisely because they are not learning foreign languages anymore. There are elements demonstrating this. Are there other arguments? I think so, but it is a lot harder to demonstrate. Let’s take the example of a French company working worldwide. When looking for a new collaborator, the company will insist on speaking English. But in reality, a French company hiring someone to work abroad will hire a English speaking French person, but this person would also need to know the language of the country to have an impact in this country. If the company hires a foreigner working in the country, let’s say if a French company wants to do business in Italy, the company will hire an English speaking Italian. But if this Italian does not speak French, how would he stay in close contact with the French company? Here again, hiring would be made on the English basis, but what appears less, is the knowledge of other languages. This needs to be highlighted and it usually appears a lot less. For a company, it can be a drawback to search for a French speaking Italian. Hence, the company will ask for fluent English. In reality, when hiring, the company will rather hire the French speaker, who would immediately be functional. Simply, because it will make things a lot easier for the company to hire someone who already speaks French.

Has the scenario you are describing already occurred?

Let’s take the example of Dassia. Renault bought Dassia in Romania and I don’t think that Renault required Dassia’s executives to speak French. But a vast majority of Dassia executives spoke French, and for them it was a lot easier to integrate into Renault’s team by speaking the language of the company. Renault’s implantation in Romania was facilitated, because French was well known in this country. It was a lot easier than when Renault implanted in Slovenia at the beginning of the nineties, with lots of problems. The French did not speak Slovenian and the Slovenians did not speak French, which had been a huge brake to the factory’s implantation for at least 10 years. They had to invest an amazing amount of money on language classes, issues that did not occur when they implanted in Romania. These issues are not well known, but they are fundamental, even more than learning English. And I do not say that learning English is useless!

A last question: earlier, I found the first communication on The Multilingual Committee of 2005. The philosophy was “The more languages you know, the more human you are”. Do you agree with this philosophy?

It is an attractive philosophy. There was another one that I doubted more. It was also in 2005, it was “Together since 1957” (in English in the text). This tag line was not very relevant to me, because it tended to be only diffused in English, but it was then translated. A lot of people protested: we are together does not mean we have a shared language. I think the tag line you mentioned is more relevant.

Also see the article published in Le Monde Diplomatique: La langue, c’est aussi de la politique.

(Photo 1: flickr/ plymouth libraries)
(Photo 2: flickr / mcdowell)

Marek Hudon: "Providing services to those excluded from the financial system"

Babel Strasbourg — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 09:46:00 +0100

Strasbourg, 14 September 2008

By Vincent Lebrou
Translated by Rob Compton

Small loans, or so-called microcredits, are increasingly being used in the fight against poverty and exclusion. Whether considering the situation in countries of the former Eastern bloc or Western European countries, it is clear that microcredit is increasingly seen by the authorities as a credible tool in the fight for social cohesion.

The European Union has launched the JEREMIE initiative, the Joint European Resources for Micro to Medium Enterprises, in collaboration with the European Investment Bank (EIB) and the European Investment Fund (EIF) to coincide with the 2007/2013 budget period. The initiative aims to improve access for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) to finance and venture capital. The initiative is part of the Lisbon strategy for economic growth and competitiveness.

It should be remembered that the prospect of getting a microcredit as a tool for economic growth and social cohesion is closely related to the number of SMEs with up to nine employees there are in the area. This group represents 99% of all businesses in Europe.

Marek Hudon is co-director of the Centre for European Research in Microfinance (CERMI, Centre Européen de Recherche en Microfinance) and course convenor of the joint complementary master’s degree in Microfinance at the Université Libre in Brussels. He spoke to Babel Strasbourg about the spread of the microcredit concept in Europe.

Marek Hudon, can you explain the microcredit system in Europe to us?

When we talk about microcredit we automatically think about southern countries and Bangladesh in particular where the Grameen Bank launched projects supporting the poorest in society in the mid 1970s. Microcredit also appeared in Latin America at that time. In basic terms a microcredit is a small loan. In Europe that can mean more than 5000 Euros (approx. GBP£3800, USD$6700), in Asia 100-200 Euros (approx. GBP£75-150, USD$130-260) and in Latin America up to 1000 Euros (approx. GBP£750, USD$1300). The size of the loan can depend on the continent, the institution and its target. In southern countries it’s often a credit group that applies, which is less often the case here in Belgium. Eastern Europe is a specific case. When I say Europe, I’m referring more to Western Europe where loans are mostly given to individuals in poverty in general but also to those excluded from the banking system in particular. Given the size of the banking system in European countries, we are talking about a very small percentage of the population. But it’s here that we find the most extreme cases. Take the case of the Democratic Republic of Congo: from a population of 60 million only 30,000 have a bank account. Financial exclusion is something found both in Europe and developing countries. Microcredits, or more generally micro-finance, attempts to provide such people with financial services.

Do you consider Microcredits to be a useful tool in Europe, and if so what should its aims be?

Around 15% of Europeans live in poverty although the figures vary between countries. As the population increases, so we see more financial exclusion. This has become an important phenomenon. In Belgium, for instance, according to statistics from the alternative financing network, for a population of 10 million around 40,000 people are excluding from the banking system. It’s a significant figure if you consider the extent of banking coverage in the country. Whether you’re speaking about people who have had accounts and been blacklisted or those who have never had an account, it’s not a negligible figure. There are still a lot of people with very low incomes; for example those living on the French RMI (minimum benefits) due to unemployment. One solution for these people - and this is something economic systems are increasingly encouraging whether you like it or not - is the establishment of small businesses and the framework for those wishing to do so. Not everybody will want to take part but for those who wish to do so there is mentoring available and microcredit really responds to that demand.

How should microcredit be further devolped in Europe?

Above all it's a communication problem! ADIE, a French association that helps people outside the labour market and the traditional banking system to create their own enterprise and employment through microcredit, has an interesting growth rate and is very active with numerous partnerships including projects with the regions. In Belgium CREDAL, a banking cooperative offering alternative credit forms, has various products aimed at women and others and these products are more and more successful. What is missing here in Belgium is publicity about microcredit. Very few people know about it. In southern countries, however, it has a very good media presence. Just take a look at CREDAL, which is a major player here in Belgium. Following a TV report about them they had a surge in demand - as people were previously unaware of their activities. The need for good communication is very important, especially as there are so many different services. It's paradoxical: There is monitoring, there are public funds but there is a lack of publicity for something this size.

What are the debates surrounding Microcredits in Europe?

The main concern is over-indebtedness. From the moment one starts working with people without any financial safeguards, in particular when these people come from disadvantaged backgrounds, and giving them loans outside the banking system, you run the risk of creating a cycle of indebtedness. In Belgium 7% of the population are in a situation of bankruptcy due to loans. In Brussels it is even 10%. Over-indebtedness is therefore a central element of the debate.

I should say that this isn't all due to microcredit. In any case, public authorities have really gotten to grips with this in Belgium. There is an office for over-indebtedness which publishes statistics on the issue. In Belgium checks are made to ensure the loans are used to create new enterprises and that these are carefully regulated. On the other hand, in southern countries people rely much more upon the social control of group members or the community. Here, however, there is a loan committee that looks at every project individually in regards to its viability and relevance. This reduces the risk of over-indebtedness.

Websites :  ADIE, CREDAL, and Réseau Financement Alternatif.

LUX Prize for Cinema awarded to ‘Le Silence de Lorna’

Babel Strasbourg — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 11:07:00 +0100

European Parliament, Strasbourg, 22nd october 2008

By Andrew Kimpson

The Belgian brothers Jean-Pierre and Luc Dardenne, directors of the mainly French language film ‘Le Silence de Lorna’, were awarded the 2008 LUX Prize for Cinema by the European Parliament in Strasbourg on Tuesday 22nd October.

The aim of the prize, voted for by members of the European Parliament, is to facilitate and promote the circulation and development of European films within the European Union. In addition to the high-profile recognition granted to the film by the prize, it will also be published with subtitles of the 23 official languages of the European Union. This will certainly help to break down the language barrier faced by European cinema and yet retain and embrace the cultural and language differences that are at the heart of the European Union.

The LUX Prize reflects the EU’s commitment in celebrating cultural diversity and encouraging intercultural dialogue. The winner in particular had a very international flavour; a collaboration between artists from Belgium, Germany, France, Italy and the United Kingdom.On receiving the prize, Director Luc Dardenne stated: "We don't see enough of each other's films in different countries of the European Union. I think this prize is the first step in remedying this problem."

In the shadow of a "giant".

The European film industry has always struggled in the shadow of the “giant” of the Hollywood film industry and unfortunately I think this may remain the case in regard to commercial entertainment. You only have to compare the rather muted presentation ceremony of the LUX Prize in the plenum of the European Parliament with the fanfare and celebrity that accompanies the Oscars to see that there is a huge gulf between the two industries in terms of both budget and interest. However, through this prize we have been shown that a more modest approach can be just as entertaining and challenging. Rather than handling the two industries as direct rivals, it may be more suitable to view European cinema as a stand alone entity and not judge it with the same parameters adopted by Hollywood, where the motto 'bigger is better' holds true. Whereas big budget films often concern themselves with fantasy and an escape from everyday life, the films recognised by the LUX Prize illustrate that European cinema is excellent at producing films that are relevant to all of us and able to tackle some very challenging social issues.

Many dark topics are dealt with in European cinema, such as problems with identity, exclusion and abuse. Kornél Mundruczó, director of the short listed Hungarian film „Delta“, stated that “films should reflect reality as a means to inform. Under dictatorships art is often deceptive of reality, but it can also be a means to encourage liberation from suppression. This capacity of film should be celebrated.” He added that identity was a very strong theme in his film; “not only as a Hungarian, but also as a European.”

Gerard Onesta, Vice President of the European Parliament, expressed his belief that “such films demonstrate that the European Union is not an impersonal institution, but a means of integration and acceptance.” Through European initiatives such as the LUX prize and projects like the Erasmus programme for academic and cultural exchange, people are brought closer together by trading diverse ideas.