Kundera In The East: A Life Across A Divide

Milan Kundera was born in Brno, in south Moravia, Czechoslovakia, now Czechia, in 1929. A committed Communist, he joined the party in 1947, shortly before enrolling at Charles University in Prague. A youthful indiscretion, apparently praising Trotsky, resulted in his exclusion from the Party in 1950, and he had to spend the remainder of his military service working in Czech coal mines.

During this time, Kundera also began work on his first two books, both poem collections, titled The Vast Garden of Man, and Last May. These garnered a positive reception, while critically not falling afoul of the Communist authorities. During the destalinisation programme of 1956, the Party rehabilitated Kundera, who gained much inspiration from the events of the following decade, and particularly the Prague Spring. He sang the praises of the independent Czech spirit in several works, like Miracle in Bohemia, The Pleasantry, and Laughable Loves, the latter two considered anti-totalitarian in outlook.

The Soviet invasion of 1968 – conducted with half a million men in arms, tanks, and a serious complement of artillery – put an end to unchecked freedom of expression in Czechoslovakia. In 1970, Kundera was again excluded from the Party, losing his teaching position in the Higher Institute for Film Studies, with the authorities going so far as to purge the libraries of his books. Having obtained a two-year visa to France, he left Czechoslovakia by car with his wife in 1975. Continuing literary success allowed him to stay in France, motivated by the jeopardy his continued existence in Czechoslovakia placed on his friends and all those who had assisted him in any way.

Kundera In The West: Bridging The Divide

Kundera’s stay in France allowed him to rise from merely national to continental relevance. Writing first in Czech and then in French, as well as receiving several important French literary prizes, he rapidly established himself as one of the most widely known writers of the period, from the late 1970s until the fall of Communism in 1989.

Kundera was first and foremost an avant-garde writer, exploring human sexuality and the evolution of gender relations in an environment where the women’s liberation movement was taking its first decisive steps forward. His position straddling East and West fascinated his newfound Western audience. He was – and remains today – an intellectual writer, heavy with reflections on the meaning of things, citing Nietzche and Ionesco, analysing his characters’ motives and feelings. But is he really an East or even Central European writer, aside from his geographic affiliation?

Reservations Of His Countrymen

Kundera was and still is a popular author in the West, and his work has been translated into many languages. In his own Czechia, this appears to not be the case. Aside from the question of how atypical a Central European writer Kundera is, there is one incident that goes a long way to explain his compatriots’ lack of interest in his literary production.

In 2008, a document emerged from a local police department. Dated 1950, the document detailed how Milan Kundera had denounced a fellow soldier, Miroslav Dvořáček, to the police. The accusation was one of desertion, accompanied by the presentation of false papers. Whether the accusation truly originated with Kundera or with someone else, the authorities’ investigation resulted in a long prison sentence for Dvořáček.

To this day, Kundera vehemently denies having made any such statement, or even knowing the man personally. At the time the documents surfaced, police forgeries were known to be used as a political tool to bring down individuals the government did not like. Kundera would be a big name to take down, and international personalities rallied to his defence. Whether or not Kundera had done this in his youth is not definitely known. What role the incident should play in judging the man and his literature is another question. Even before the accusation, Czech readers seemed to have some reservations about him and his work.

Is Kundera’s lack of wide following in the Czech Republic an indication that the writer has left his roots behind? Without having some intimate knowledge of the Communist period first-hand, or access to anecdotes from the generations involved, it’s difficult to venture an opinion – even more so when his Czech works have seen less attention than those he produced in the West.

There are reasons, however, to think this might be the case, as unusual as it might be. Czech and Eastern European readers will chafe at the Marxist label petite bourgeoisie in art, and yet there are many bourgeois elements in Kundera’s work that seem to transcend his upbringing or harken back to another time. His psychological understanding of human behaviour is profound and occupies the main focus of his work. Yet though he talks of couples, threesomes, sexual and romantic attractions, hardly any families figure in Kundera’s work. Society would not ‘reproduce’, to use a near-Marxist term, without families.

His characters live, like all bourgeois characters in similar microscopic dissections, in a world of sexual impulses, devoid of thoughts or even a word about contraception, pregnancy, childbirth, or abortion. And of course, nobody really works very much in his novels and stories. The focus lies entirely with their emotional life, suspended beyond any material considerations. Early in his life, Kundera had criticized ‘social realism’. It is clear he didn’t like it. Yet, still with all this, Milan Kundera is a marvellous and insightful writer. The only question that remains is if there is a Central European Czech writer named Milan Kundera, or only a French writer in the making.

Why Read The Book of Laughter and Forgetting

The Book of Laughter and Forgetting gives the reader ample occasion to judge Kundera’s vocation as a writer. The English translation by Aaron Asher for Harper is very readable, and available in paperback. Written late in his life while in France, there are in this collection of short stories many which deal with the period when Kundera still lived in Czechoslovakia under communist rule. They are seen through the lens of memory – another main theme in his works – of a man, now successful and living in the West. Yet much of his early experience remains.

Other stories explore gender relationships. These are more typical of his vocation as an avant-garde writer of contemporary mores. Here, like Nabokov, the sharp incisive knife of his pen dissects the characters’ motives. The writing is clear, without excess; the human drama is seen in a world in which God has been dead for a long time. But other things have died and been buried for this post-modernist. Whether looking at Kundera’s communists, unrelentingly bad, or his heroes and heroines, unrelentingly coupling, Kundera’s experience of communism has led him to replace the political project with the mundane. Life is the sum of its daily sorrows and joys. All projects have long ago been defeated and forgotten.

The post Understanding Milan Kundera: The Bridge Between Two Europes appeared first on My Country? Europe..

The Different Aspects of the European Project

At a time when the European project is demanding a renewed commitment from its citizens it is useful to examine the parameters of engagement to the nation and earlier forms of identity. From this, European citizens can take some useful aspects, but other parts they ought to discard if they are determined to fully pledge their allegiance to the Union.

The twelve starred flag on a field of blue, the ‘Ode to Joy’, and ‘Bella Ciao’ are perhaps the easiest parts of a ‘European’ identity. On the other hand, other aspects may prove a bit harder to assimilate: new languages, additional taxes, new political, geographical, and economic information. These come together with dilution of political agency caused by enlargement and federalism, with increased competition, and even new military and defense commitments. All of these are a few of the more noticeable demands placed on the would-be citizen of the European Union. Coming from a place rich in varying traditions, the ‘nation state’, these demands will be taken on with varying degrees of enthusiasm. Trying to understand the old allegiances can help prepare for the new.

The Myth Of The Nation

Of all the social myths one of the more difficult to reconcile logically is “nationalism”. Unlike justice, progress, popular democracy, or even heaven and the after-life, the ‘nation’ is supposedly a well defined, observable phenomenon of human societies. However, under-scrutiny this notion and its simplistic appeal fall apart to an unanticipated extent. This concept is perhaps as elusive as it is familiar.

What exactly is a “nation?” Is the nation a collection of borders that have changed numerous times, even in recent memory? A collection of peoples whose genetic mix is so great and diverse that they are hardly distinguishable from their neighbors and even related to such far flung ancestors as Central Asians, Turks, Semites, Africans, Neanderthals or Denizovs found the world over? Or perhaps it consists of a collection of languages but then how many to include? From this, it would seem that nationalism is one of the most vague notions we adhere to. However, it is still one of the most persistent and  troublesome myths in modern times. People will build their identity around it. As a consequence, we also define states, organise passions, start wars, and justified mass killings because of it.

The Dawn of the Nation State

In the modern era the birth of the nation state links to the decline of the Holy Roman empire, from about 1200 CE onwards. We ought to remember that Empires are not nations, they are made up of numerous ethnicities. Empires would normally recognise citizens of all different origins in one way or another. Peoples maintained their original identities even while being and identifying themselves as an integral part of the empire. Nation states are different. They may accept minorities within their borders, but may also insist on their assimilation. The boundaries of an empire are fluid things, expanding and contracting over time, those of the nation state are perceived as fixed for eternity, though in reality they are not.

A nation is more similar, but not identical, to a kingdom. A kingdom starts as the birthright of an individual and it evolves into a jurisdiction. The loyalty of the kingdom’s subjects is to the natural right of the king derived from God, even though the king is not a god himself. By contrast the right of the nation to exist is enshrined in natural law, not in the authority of a single person.

Somewhat akin to race, an even more nebulous concept, though a solid fixture of 21^st century vocabulary, the nation comforts, protects and gives us a sense of identity while it also exacts a psychological toll. It makes numerous demands of its adherents including ultimately death to protect its projection of power and its dominant class. However, a nation does not give it citizens unlimited access to its power and wealth in return. The share they get will depend on the socio-economic status. It can go from virtually nothing for the homeless to untold wealth and power for a fortunate few. Efforts to legitimise a ‘safety net’, a guaranteed income, constitutional or other birth rights and entitlements like universal education have come and gone in the nation state. They remain precarious.

War and Security, the Myth of a Nation’s Power

It wasn’t always that the nation was thought to be the guarantor of security for the community. In the feudal era, the feudal lord was responsible for the community’s defense. He ordered the construction of a defensive fortress where he resided and wherein the community took refuge in times of danger. The feudal lord organised the men who would accompany him to battle, assured the provision of their equipment when social custom didn’t require them to do so themselves, mapped out their strategy and led them into battle. They were also responsible for external relations of the community, making alliances where he saw fit breaking other alliances for the community’s protection or advancement.

When kings began to replace local feudal lords, the king’s armies, first in parallel with local forces and afterwards replacing them, became the principal guarantor of power. The identification of the king, though his domains would often be contiguous with what would later become the nation, was a process imbued with religion and faith as well as power and relationships.

From Kingdom to Nation

As God’s incarnation on earth the king’s existence imposed special loyalties and obligations on the subjects. Lese-majesteor, deposing a king was no longer a simple political matter but a direct affront to God and his power. But it was not directly an affront to the community or the nation.

During the middle ages and through to the modern period in Europe kings could and did come from other countries. The Monarchs of England are today from Germanic descent, Queen Elizabeth retaining only a minor lineal connection to the British kings of the past. The Austrian Hapsburg house ruled for long periods in France, Spain and the Netherlands as well as Austria-Hungary, they acquired those positions through marriage and conquest.

It wasn’t until later that the idea of nation, a legally bound territory with some consistency in ethnicity, customs, and laws started to become the principal repository of security. The predominance of the nation as a political organisation continues today. It has been eroded both from above and from below. From above by supra-national organisations, like the former Soviet Union and the European Union, and from below by strong regional independence movements such as in Scotland, Catalan region, or Northern Italy and Corsica.

The European Union An Empire or Supra-National State?

The current European Union presents itself halfway between some of the more ambitious alliances of the past and today’s somewhat tenuous notion of nation as a federation of regions.

In the past, however, national loyalties were constructed not inspired by treaties between different parties. France, the UK, Italy, and Germany were all built from regions who had little desire to join anything larger than themselves except on a limited basis in times of external threat. School curriculum, the clergy, the consecration of festivals, holidays, and symbols, all contributed to fostering national identity at a time when local loyalties were still stronger. Even Greek City states, so famously successful in attracting the loyalty of their citizens, were originally built on forced migrations from the surrounding countryside. In time, festivals, gods, and other attractions of the Polis would make their citizens feel Athenian, Spartan, Corinthian (or other) and then Greek. Similarly, European identity will need to be crafted as part of an ongoing, emergent process.

Moving Forward

Ultimately, the creation of the nation states and its allegiances was a gradual process that happened over time. With this in mind, the lack of initial wide-spread enthusiasm to the notion of Europe should not be insurmountable. However, we ought to be careful in relying on symbols, holidays, religious sermons, or even laws like universal conscription to build the sentiment of belonging to a European nation today. Times have changed too much, people are better informed, educated, and accustomed to individual freedoms. The key to success will be in choosing carefully sustainable values on which to build the Union. Many of these are already in place in the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizens and the European Charter. Respect for these values including the more divisive ones such as human rights, minority rights, immigrants’ rights, and territorial integrity, and the ultimate surrender of sovereignty will be key to the successful emergence of Europe. In contrast, allowing individual, regional, national, or religious interests to prevail will make the building of a successful union more difficult.

Stephen Sposato

The post From the Identity of Each Nation to a Union appeared first on My Country? Europe..

England, like the rest of Europe, has changed enormously since that time. Europe itself is happily learning to put all these national and class conceits behind, although some think they can now turn them towards third world immigrants. Despite those anticipated changes, writers like George Orwell stand above their époque leading us by example into a future few could see at the time.

The Engaged Writer

Writers since the time of the Greeks and Romans have addressed governing the polis as an integral part of their art and vocation. During the Middle Ages, Dante and Machiavelli continued these traditions. In France, Voltaire, Rousseau and d’Alembert prepared the path for Chamfort, Mirabeau, then Zola and Hugo. Schiller and Heine played similar roles in German literature.

In the wake of World War II and the flowering of philosophical thought in Europe, the old was shed in a search for new social paradigms. The ‘engaged writer’ became a thing in contemporary parlance with the existential philosophy of Sartre, though writers had often embraced social activism before. This now articulated existential posture was embodied in the writing and social action of Camus and his contemporaries.

In a world governed by existence, the writer was no longer assigned his or her place in society by fate or religion; but chose it. The ‘nothing’ inside Sartre’s seminal work Being and Nothingness allowed man to create his existence and its meaning from whole cloth. Few were better suited to do this than the writer who combined intellect with action.

Enter Eric Blair

Much of the reversal of values finding its expression in philosophy and literature was created by the war – in fact, two World Wars – as well as an intervening pandemic and economic depression. It is not surprising then to find engaged writers preceding by a few years Sartre’s discovery of them. Such a writer was George Orwell, born Eric Blair. Similar engagement characterised many others, both in the pre and post-war period. Had the challenges of the time solicited such an ardent response?

For Eric Blair, who had come from Burmese service, the path to writing was different than that of his aristocrat peers. From little England and a scholarship to Eton to run off to Paris, joining the anarchists to fight in Spain’s civil war, and even writing and organising for the British Labour Party, his accomplishments are a heroic feat for his time and class.

Upbringing and Background

Eric Blair was born in Burma the son of an ennobled bourgeois family who had lost their fortune and found their way to a middle-class existence through the sinecure of foreign service. Eric was too young to know Burma when he returned to England with his mother and sister to await their father’s retirement shortly before the birth of a younger sister.

To understand Eric, or more particularly what he refused to become, it is necessary to understand the rigid class system of the period. The system in its current form dates from the Normans. The Normans used their newfound power in invasion and defeat of the English at Hastings in 1066 to rule over the English nobility. The English were relegated to the status of minor nobility with circumspect local powers. Status was guarded jealousy.

The Normand-English now allied with the royal houses of Europe were at the pinnacle of the hierarchy; English dukes, counts and minor nobles ruled locally at their pleasure. Unlike on the continent, the English yeoman was nearly completely alienated from his ultimate rulers. For a time after the invasion, the Normans spoke French obliging the lower nobility to get on as they could linguistically. Latin was the second language of the educated, ahead of Anglo-Saxon English.

Even today, the multiplicity of class accents reflects these divisions. Ennoblement was a distinction meant to keep the system functioning and turn successful local functionaries into allies and members of the establishment. The boarding school system, itself separated into hierarchical tiers, reinforced the power of the upper classes through education.

The Boarding School System: Orwell’s Education

Eric Blair’s status put him at the bottom rungs of this system, though well above the toiling class. His family’s finances made climbing those rungs difficult. But he was fortunate in several ways and also enterprising. His studies paved the way for a partial scholarship. Both the first World War, which emptied the school dormitories of future officers for the front and his own success on the two and a half-day entry exam enabled Eric to obtain a place and scholarship to Eton at the upper limit of his class aspirations.

The boarding school system, especially his preparatory school Saint Cyprian’s, was a brutal and lonely experience that stunted the growth of many Englishman from Oscar Wilde to C.S. Lewis when it wasn’t producing hardened officers for the Empire. Orwell’s uniqueness began here as he did not accept the unreasonable demands of what C.S. Lewis, George Monbiot and Virginia Woolf call an ‘English pathology’. His own scathing critique of the school in Such, Such Were The Joys was so unique and disturbing at the time that it was rarely read and hardly republished.

A friend and fellow Saint Cyprian, Cyril Connolly, one of the few to also reject his school experience, writes of Eric (now George): “The remarkable thing about Orwell was that he alone among the boys was an intellectual and not a parrot, for he thought for himself, read Shaw and Samuel Butler, and rejected not only [St. Cyprian’s] but the war, the Empire, Kipling, Success and Character”. A false sense of ‘Success and Character’ was the principal mantra of the school’s education according to Connolly, and undoubtedly Orwell as well.

Early Reflections of George Orwell

Orwell’s rejection of the war in 1918 as a ‘meaningless slaughter’ was not yet cemented in stone. This would come later as he was still prone to youthful moments of patriotism. No longer working as hard at Eton he would not present himself for a scholarship to Oxford. That would end his schooling, a bourse a ‘sine qua non’ given family finances for university. This was hardly uncommon for the period, even for an Etonian.

It was the exam for the Imperial Police that he presented instead. Successfully competing, he received a posting to Burma where his ideas on imperialism, war and socialism would take further shape. The education, as inadequate as Orwell considered it, for he was a voracious reader beyond the confines of his courses, gave him a humanitarian culture and confidence. Experience of the world gave him material for reflection. He was fast becoming an engaged writer, a democratic socialist and humanist. In the eyes of the governing half of England though, he was, if not entirely a traitor to his class, on the margins of ‘acceptable’ behaviour’.

Spain and World War II

In 1936, Orwell left a grocery store that he had started with his wife to volunteer to fight with the anarchists and Trotskyites in Spain, After 115 days fighting on the Aragon front, he returned to England – not without a souvenir, having experienced a bullet to the neck and partial paralysis of the right arm and loss of his voice. Home, in England he found the Spanish Civil War had resolved nothing in Europe’s march to a continent-wide conflagration. Shortly thereafter, he captured his experience of the civil war in Homage To Catalonia, a book criticized both by the British Tory establishment and Labour which was decidedly pro-Moscow and anti-Trotskyite and anarchist.

Orwell was not surprised. The allies had let the fascists triumph in Spain next door while making all sorts of noise about Munich and the Sudetenland in the inaccessible heart of Europe. They would not have been able to stop Hitler there even if they had wanted to. Nearby Spain might well have been another story. The machinations of the communists too were clear to him.

Post-War

World War II had been anticipated by Orwell’s My Country Right or Left. Orwell was, when all was said and done despite his reservations, a patriot. Hitler had to be defeated. He still held out hope that all the killing might result in some sort of revolutionary moment, improving the conditions of the working class once and for all.

He tried in various ways to make himself useful to the war effort, including enlisting, but his tuberculosis always got in the way. Furthermore, he wrote for numerous publications, his insights becoming increasingly recognized as political reporting of the first order. Eventually, he was signed up as a program broadcaster for the BBC Far Eastern service, something between reporting and propaganda, which he was more than willing to do.

Major Works of George Orwell

George Orwell died in 1950 at the age of 46 from tuberculosis, which plagued him all his life and caused him to have several serious bouts of pneumonia. In spite of this, he led an active life and was a very prolific writer. He is survived by his adopted son with his first wife Eileen.

We can add to the works already cited, Wigan’s Pier, his tribute to the coal miners and the working class of northern England, written shortly before the war. His major works, Animal Farm and 1984 came after the war and are classics of world literature. The latter, written while he was ill from Tuberculosis, has given its name to regimes of dystopian tyranny, especially ‘Newspeak’, the invented language of the totalitarian state.

Reading Orwell has been somewhat distorted by the success of these major works. They are truly brilliant and classical works of world literature but they have themselves become tools of the propaganda he detested. These two books were used to portray Orwell as an anti-communist and defender of liberal capitalism. The former he was, though not religiously, his socialism leaned toward the Trotskyite, the latter he certainly was not.

Why Should You Read Orwell?

Today’s Europe was formed through two World Wars, the struggle between fascism, capitalism, communism and decolonization. Orwell was present at the forefront of these events as a journalist and writer. His keen eye of observer, lucid intelligence, experience and emphasis on clear expository writing makes him indispensable for understanding Europe’s formative years. Read and appreciated by both left and right, he cuts through much of the dross of ideologies to understand the fate of man in this tumultuous period.

The post George Orwell: His Story and Legacy appeared first on My Country? Europe..

The agreement is still subject to review and cancellation by both parties and needs approval by the British and European parliaments, as well as by the Council of the EU. All EU Member States will also have to ratify it before it takes effect. There isn’t enough time left to get it done before the expiration of trading rights – which were supposed to lapse in January 2020 but were extended by one year to the dawn of 2021. EU Ambassadors have already stated that trading rights will be extended again, until the Council and Parliament vote to ratify the agreement.

What’s Been Agreed To?

As of December 13th, well past the initial deadlines for an agreement supposed to take effect at the end of the year, agreement on what was to be done in the case of abrogation of the accord and fishing rights in UK waters were still outstanding. Brussels and London eventually resolved this, even though it was by then impossible to have a new regime in place by the end of the year. The question of fishing remains perhaps one of the most perplexing aspects of the entire negotiations, with bizarre prominence both during the talks and in the text itself.

A free trade agreement with zero tariffs and quotas for all goods had already been agreed to by both parties. This is something the UK has already touted as the ‘largest’ free trade agreement ever and more than a justification for Brexit which would leave it in a privileged place along with Canada and Australia in regards to the community. This privileged trading position is, nevertheless, one which inhibits the prior free trade in services that the UK enjoyed as an EU member. All services account for over 80% of GDP. These include: financial, retailing, computer, medical, legal, realty, transport, hospitality and entertainment, to name only the most prominent,

The true body blow to the British economy, however, is the exclusion of financial services from the agreement. One of the mainstays of British power since the long-gone days of empire, its far reach kept London in competition with New York and Hong Kong on the short, gilded list of global financial hubs. Now, British finance will no longer have a privileged position in the EU. Paris and Frankfurt are likely to gain further ground, perhaps replacing the City altogether as the centre of European finance.

Though perhaps not as dire, the competitive position of British insurance companies – like the much-vaunted Lloyd’s of London – will also be in jeopardy. Other services too will no longer enjoy privileged status. Their professionals will need to apply for certification to practice in the EU. The services themselves may be taxed or subject to limitations.

These aspects of the new relationship are not new. Both parties entered into the final round of talks knowing, and accepting, that the UK would have to live with these limitations. The major point of contention was the continued acceptance of EU rules governing the quality and safety of traded goods, and what to do if they were no longer adhered to. The UK would agree to accept EU rules, not in perpetuity. They wanted to be able to change them and still have access. The EU stated that in such cases the playing field might no longer be level for its producers. They proposed arbitration before the European Court of Justice with the imposition of tariffs and quotas anew as a possible outcome.

Intervention by the European Court in adjudicating disputes was anathema to Brexiteers of all stripes. The talks were at an impasse. The break came when – after almost a year of discussions – the UK put forth a last-minute proposal to set up independent arbitration. In this context, London also accepted the imposition of tariffs and quotas as a possible remedy. The way was paved for an agreement on fishing rights and a final accord. Unfortunately, the clamour of contentious issues on the allotment of the fishing catch drowned out the critical question of its sustainability. One can only hope at this point that the green, or in the case of fish blue, aspects of future sustainability were taken into account.

British citizens will no longer have free access to the EU. There was no agreement on further cooperation in defence and intelligence. The popular Erasmus programme also will no longer accept British students – though there is an exception for Northern Ireland students, thanks to Ireland’s generous volunteering of funding for their northern neighbours.

Northern Ireland will also remain within the EU’s trade zone, with a special agreement allowing the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland to remain open. Some commentators have quipped that London has managed the rather unremarkable feat of creating a free trade area that is actually smaller than the UK’s national borders. A further review of the Brexit agreement is scheduled for 2024, at which time the clauses may see further changes by mutual agreement.

The Future of Brexit

Lorries are already queued up for miles around Dover and throughout Kent – but this is now largely due to Covid restrictions, imposed recently because of new strains found in the UK. French President Macron has promised to lift restrictions for lorries tied to Covid. The often predicted queues from a no-deal Brexit will even under this agreement be likely to replace the Covid tie-ups with new ones, even before they are dissipated. This is because the late hour will leave no time to sort out loose ends.

Even if the EU ambassadors have their wish and the current status of the movement of goods is extended until the agreement can be ratified, the absence of detailed implementation regulations, which still need to be drawn up, will create impediments and slow border crossings. Such simple things as new tariff codes, lorry drivers’ passports, proper paperwork and compliance documents, will need to be worked out. It will be well into spring before trade is flowing smoothly again and until summer to return to normal.

Financial markets have already factored in the much greater effect Brexit will have on the UK. This does not pre-empt further deterioration. Absent other agreements with the United States, and some key markets in Asia, the UK will be stuck with diminished trade. Overall economic conditions will follow, though it is difficult to sort out precisely the effects of trade from those of COVID-19 and other geopolitical developments.

The post As the Ink Dries: What’s in the Brexit Agreement? appeared first on My Country? Europe..

Up until the New Year, but not one day longer, the United Kingdom, despite having formally left the EU already, will remain a member of the single market for goods and services and, although not a member of the Schengen area, it will also continue allowing free movement of people. This gives rise to an issue when considering the possibility of further extensions of the negotiations for a post-Brexit arrangement for trade and people: any agreements before January 1, when the existing arrangements become null and void.

What does No-Deal mean?

If Great Britain exits the EU in a no-deal situation on January 1, trade would automatically return to World Trade Organization (WTO) rules. WTO rules are liberal in the sense that they admit most goods and services and impose low tariff rates. However, they are more restrictive than the current ‘single market’ arrangement the UK enjoys with the EU. Currently, 50% of UK trade, imports and exports, is with the EU – this would make raising tariffs and other impediments costly for the UK. It would also, of course, have an impact on the EU, but with the EU’s total external trade with the UK only representing about 12% of the total, the impact will be inferior.

Major categories of UK exports such as automobiles would further be affected by 10% WTO tariffs, making many car exports uncompetitive. Large automakers with factories in the UK, like Nissan, have already suggested they would be forced to leave. UK suppliers for products finished in the EU could also be replaced,  for example as in the case of the British Rolls Royce engines for the Airbus, which compete with the USA’s GE Aviation or Pratt & Whitney.

Imported foodstuffs, of which 80% come from the EU and which supply nearly one-third of total UK consumption, could also be affected. Here, the issue is not only tariffs and higher prices for consumers, but also differing phytosanitary regulations. Once again, the EU will also be affected, although to a lesser extent. Whether EU rules will still allow for the importation of UK sourced lamb and some other products remains to be seen.

Pharmaceuticals also present a serious problem.  Approval mechanisms and production controls will no longer be accepted mutually and will result in significant pipeline delays for many medications people need.  Hopefully this can be remedied through stop gap measures but so far this has not been done.

Immediate Disruption

A UK government study has estimated that, in a worst-case scenario surrounding a no-deal outcome, roughly 7,000 lorries could be held up from crossing the channel. Even in the case of a deal implemented at the last minute, significant disruption will take place as few of the new tariff codes and phytosanitary regulations would be in place to apply to incoming and outgoing goods on both sides of the Channel.

The UK has put in place traffic and staging plans to deal with the situation, but the disruptions in southeast England and northern France and the Benelux would be enormous. For its part, the EU has put in place contingency plans that would allow airline flights to continue for six months with grandfathered inspection recognition, providing mutual action by the UK. The EU contingency also calls for a one-year grandfathering of fishing rights also contingent on reciprocity. Fishing industries in both the EU and UK would be hit hard by a no-deal. Navies are already being prepped to enforce the rules.

Movement of People

Free movement of people between the EU and UK will end on January 1. Though visas are not envisaged for visits under 90 days, passports, medical attestations of insurance, automobile insurance papers and other documentation will become more onerous than at present. After 90 days, EU citizens wishing to remain in the UK will have to apply for a change of status. This will be true even for spouses of UK citizens. It is not yet clear how various EU member states might regulate UK citizens in similar circumstances. On the other hand, the EU travel ban on non-EU countries due to COVID-19 could be extended to the UK with the New Year.

Northern Ireland

The border between Northern Ireland and Ireland was a key aspect of contention in the withdrawal agreement. Keeping the border open for the thousands of people who cross daily for work and social activities has been since the Good Friday Agreement are a major focus of both Irish governments.

Although the UK agreed to maintain open borders by checking goods for EU compliance at sea, the UK has already tried to renege on this agreement. It immediately back stepped after meeting stiff resistance from the EU as well as third parties like the US, with its incoming Biden administration, and the UN. Nevertheless, as this issue touches on UK sovereignty, in the absence of a post-Brexit deal it may come under further pressure.

Who is to blame?

If there is such a thing as blame in the failure to reach an agreement beneficial to both sides, it must certainly fall on the side which may want a no-deal agreement in the first place. In the eyes of most observers, this appears to be the UK. Though the popular movement around the original Brexit vote was strong, it was fanned by a political class of Tory politicians having a lot to gain personally by a return of greater sovereignty to the UK.

As the rather nebulous aspects of UK ‘sovereignty’ have inserted themselves into the negotiations for a new trading agreement, they have made any agreement difficult to reach on purely beneficial terms. The perceived matter of the UK having final say has made agreement elusive. Final say in trade is, unfortunately, a non sequitur as both sides must adhere to the rules if there is to be any equitable trade at all.

The post What Happens Next in Case of a No-Deal Brexit? appeared first on My Country? Europe..

When I was a student in Belgium at the Universite de Louvain in the 1970s, I first heard that Friedrich Nietzsche’s collected writings were the books of choice on the nightstand of every European intellectual. Though I had already read some Nietzsche, this practice impressed me. I continued with my reading of the great thinker alongside my regular studies in economics. Nietzsche can be best defined as a thinker and, through his writings, thinking for one’s self is precisely what is acquired.

I am no longer in touch with the new generation of intellectuals and students to know if this still holds true. At the time, though, it did. The notions learned from frequenting the great European thinkers shed light on the deep roots of problems we otherwise only understand on a deceptive surface. Such a problem, I surmise, is the European project. In these times, dusting off Nietzsche’s insights can help us understand European unity both that which we have lived since his time and that still to come.

A Philosophical Note

Nietzsche’s philosophy is not one of the theorems and their derivatives but rather an exploration of the dialectical contradiction found in life’s phenomenon. He often states an observation than its opposite. He opens our minds more than transmitting a ready-made doctrine.

Nietzsche has long suffered from unfortunate associations with Nazi ideology and from being summarily dismissed in the Anglo-Saxon world. Despite this, he has remained an influential thinker on modern culture. His association with Nazi philosophy has always been a distortion. It was enthusiastically encouraged by his sister Elizabeth Forster-Nietzsche, an Aryan zealot, who became curator of his literary estate upon Nietzsche’s death.

Concepts like Nietzsche’s ‘Ubermensch’ in Thus Spoke Zarathustra are unclear at best, but here certainly relate more to a wise philosopher and elite aristocrat than any mass movement. Such concepts, grossly distorted, were seized upon to claim the great thinker for Nazi ideology. This conclusion would be impossible for anyone who actually read Nietzsche.

A Proponent of ‘Europe’

Nietzsche was a proponent of ‘Europe’ and a critic of the narrowness of the European nation-state. Germany is often the subject of his ire. One of the few things on which Nietzsche is abundantly clear is his dislike of the militant elements in German politics and culture of his epoch, ones that he predicted would lead to national destruction, long before Hitler was born. He sees no dialectic here, only looming disaster.

Take, for example, this one of very many of denunciations Nietzsche levelled against German militarism, antisemitism and nationalism, taken from Gaya Scienza: “No, we do not love humanity; but on the other hand, we are not merely ‘German’ enough, in the sense in which the word ‘German’ is constantly being used these days, to advocate nationalism and race hatred and to be able to take pleasure in the national scabies of the heart and blood poisoning that now leads the nations of Europe to delimit and barricade themselves against each other as if it were a matter of quarantine […]”.

And, if it was necessary for him to be clearer, here is an excerpt from a letter he wrote while in Switzerland in 1887: “I feel kinship only with the most cultivated French and Russian people, but not at all with the so-called distinguished elite among my own countrymen who judge everything from the principle: ‘Germany above everything’ (Deutschland über alles)”.

Cultural Views from Nietzsche

Nietzsche repeatedly denounces the anti-semitism that he finds rabid in German culture dating at least from the writings of Martin Luther, which he considers a sickness of weak-minded individuals lacking self-esteem. Any careful reader of the philosopher would confidently conclude that he would say the same about anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant sentiment today.

It is also apparent reading Nietzsche that the marriage between continental Europe and the Anglo-Saxons was on shaky footing from the start. Nietzsche finds Anglo-Saxon culture radically different from the values he cherishes on the continent. Plebian values of “individual happiness” and “practicality” made the Anglo-Saxons unfit for the great cultural projects that Nietzsche felt were at the heart of any civilization and that he saw as the future of Europe.

Making Good Europeans

Nietzsche does not content himself with simply dissecting the nationalist illness of the day. Instead of prophesising where it would lead, he attempted to embrace an alternative.

Writing to his mother from Sils Maria, the Romanish-speaking village in the Engadine valley in Switzerland, that he liked to frequent,  in 1886 he sets himself apart from those he criticizes: “Even if I should be a bad German, I am at all events a very good European”.

Nietzsche’s ‘good Europeans’ had a few important common traits: a secular, cosmopolitan culture that was at home across the continent. They were individuals comfortable with many languages and cultures, and who display open and inquisitive minds. They were Renaissance men, Europeans, completely free from the national and religious passions of their day.

He also gives a few important examples of individuals who he perceives to fit this description. In addition to Napoleon, these are Goethe, Beethoven, Stendhal, Heine, Schopenhauer, and even Wagner, whom he’d previously fallen out with due to the nationalist elements present in his music.

“We are, in one word – and let this be our word of honour – good Europeans, the heirs of Europe, the rich, oversupplied, but also overly obligated heirs of thousands of years of European spirit.” – Gaya Scienza.

A Final Reflection

Nietzsche appreciated the folk evolution of the European peoples in their variety. However, after having created diverse types of excellence influenced by geography, climate, language, diet and the many other factors that constitute a culture, he thought that their day had come to an end. His “good Europeans” had taken a dialectical step beyond this stage of evolution. They were citizens of the world comfortable anywhere.

At a time when nationalist and racist passions have again come into fashion, along with narrow-minded interests not too different from those prevailing in Nietzsche’s time, we find some in Europe turned inward and against any notion of openness. It would be good to remember, especially now, his warnings and where Europe may be headed again if not heeded.

The post Making Good Europeans: Lessons From Nietzsche on European Unity appeared first on My Country? Europe..

An Israel Peace Agreement to Prepare for War?

Since the founding of the state of Israel, there has always been peace between Israel and the countries of the Gulf. Moreover, while the Gulf States support the Palestinians financially, they are also virtual allies with Israel against their mutual enemy Iran. So why was diplomatic recognition not accorded earlier? It was a largely symbolic choice to show solidarity with the Palestinian cause. More importantly, the normalisation of relations was also used as a bargaining chip to gain some concessions from Israel.

With the UAE and Bahrain peace agreements with Israel, these concessions have taken a precise shape, one strongly influenced by Washington. In particular, these have taken the form of Israeli approval of US arms sales to the Gulf and withdrawal of plans to annex the West Bank. Palestinian solidarity, such as it is, was thrown by the wayside, though humanitarian aid from the Gulf continues.

The significance of Israeli approval of US arms sales – agreed to as a quid pro quo for recognition – comes principally from the role Israeli lobbying plays in US politics. Without Israel’s approval, its AIPAC lobby in the US routinely painted any attempt to sell weapons to the Gulf States as a betrayal of Israel, even though there was no chance of them ever being used against it. With Israeli’s approval, the most modern weaponry can be sold at the highest prices, siphoning off hefty surcharges in form of bribes for all concerned.

By better arming the Gulf States, further preparation for the eventual Sunni-Israeli war with Shia Iran goes forward. The Sunnis would like to destroy the Shias once and for all, and Israel’s ambitions to expand its territory into a Greater Israel would find a smoother path without Iran acting as a major roadblock.

As for annexation of the West Bank, the increasingly expansionist Israeli population appears very disappointed that it will not take place. Its importance, however, is somewhat dubious. Just like as peace between Israel and the Gulf States was a reality even without any accord, the annexation of the West Bank has been the de facto state of being for a long time. Israel rules over every sneeze and twitch in the region. It is not clear that formal annexation would have helped Israel in any way. It is indeed quite possible that formal annexation would have focused international attention on the situation, leading to further sanctions and isolation for Israel. It just might have been a catalyst for some improvement, even if hardly ideal in and of itself.

As it is, the peace agreement does not change the situation in the West Bank and rather prepares the countries of the region for more war while assuring that the corruption by the elites continues apace. No wonder no one is celebrating peace.

Where is the EU?

The European Union currently has an association agreement with Israel which facilitates economic relations and also provides aid to the Palestinians. Relations were somewhat troubled by the 2015 EU decision to label Israeli products from the West Bank according to their origin in the settlements. This measure went to the heart of the international debate of Israel as a state, with Israelis fearing that the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement over the Palestinian situation would harm their interests substantially if allowed to take root.

The Israeli government did everything within its power to prevent this grassroots pro-Palestinian movement from gaining traction, including lobbying to make it illegal in many Western jurisdictions and systematically attacking its proponents, not to exclude disinformation campaigns without official attribution. After the EU nevertheless approved the labelling, Netanyahu decided to suspend, pending review, the EU’s role in the peace process.

The two most recent High Representatives of the EU for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Federica Mogherini and Joseph Borrell, have generally been perceived to be pro-Palestinian. Within the Union itself, Franco-German leadership which pushes for a two-state solution that would recognise a Palestinian state has been somewhat compromised by positions taken by the Visegrad countries of Eastern Europe, more favourable to Israel. Anti-Muslim sentiment by the currently dominant political right in Eastern Europe, along with ideological considerations, have made them more favourable to the status quo and Israeli interests.

This internal conflict came to a head when the US moved its embassy to Jerusalem. Several Visegrad countries, along with Romania, prevented an EU resolution condemning the move. The countries were also persuaded to abstain on a UN resolution condemning the US move rather than voting with the position of the Union, under threats from US Ambassador to the UN Nicki Haley and intense lobbying from Israel.

The situation has not been without domestic repercussions inside the EU. The still large French-Jewish community has been troubled by Muslim-Jewish relationships and even more by third-party propaganda to the point of considering additional emigration to Israel. The refugee situation resulting from the Syrian conflict has also caused an upheaval in domestic politics and has been used by third parties to destabilize the Union.

All Roads Lead from Jedda To Teheran

The occupation of Palestine – while an international catastrophe that has been the leitmotif of international politics of the past 70 years – is yet but a minor scene in a larger conflict on the stage that of Shia Iran and Sunni Saudi Arabia. This age-old religious conflict, now with additional geopolitical reasons, informs all of the wars in the region, either directly through active participation or indirectly through proxies, arms and diplomacy.

The Syrian conflict pits Shia Syria with aid from Iran and Russia, which has an important naval base and troops there, against Sunni insurgents including ISIS, aided by Saudi Arabia and Israel. France and the Netherlands, along with the United States and the UK, have aided the Syrian rebels while maintaining their opposition to ISIS, though other EU countries – notably Germany – have objected. The Kurds constitute a third force, opposing ISIS, but opposed by Turkey and in a somewhat ambivalent relationship with Assad’s Syrian government.

As the bet by the West to oust Assad has failed miserably, contributing to a refugee crisis in Western Europe, the conflict has to some extent reverted to its Shia-Sunni origins with the wild card of Kurdish independence and now Turkey thrown into the mix.

Though condemning the recent agreements recognizing Israel, Turkey’s role in the conflicts straddles both sides. Becoming the first Muslim country to recognize Israel in 1949, Turkey has also been (together with Iran) one of the few reliable supporters of the Palestinians in the region. Relations with Israel, on the other hand, have ebbed and flowed. Turkey 80% Sunni majority has frequently supported Iran in regional conflicts, notably showing support for the country during its nuclear negotiations with the West.

It has had a more contentious relationship to Saudi Arabia, perhaps culminating in the killing of a Saudi journalist by the Saudis in their Consulate in Istanbul. Turkey is a member of NATO, but in its own region has shown considerable independence and is currently in a very contentious relationship with other NATO members in the Eastern Mediterranean where natural gas interests are at stake.

A Final Thought

These agreements bare the hallmark of the corrupt self-dealing that has subsumed politics in the Middle East. By upholding the values of peace, respect for human rights and democracy, the EU can play a major role in shining a light of hope during this period of darkness.

The post As UAE and Bahrain Normalise Relations With Israel, Where Is the EU? appeared first on My Country? Europe..

Germany has just taken up the mantle of a six-month rotating Council of Ministers Presidency this past July, in what promises to be a momentous time for Europe. The challenges of the virus, economic collapse, Chinese ambitions and American disarray demand a new cap for the European ship of state. What can we hope to see from this German Presidency, and what can we expect to see from European leaders in light of these challenges?

An Augean Challenge

There are several challenges for the German Presidency which will test Merkel’s mettle, her political alliances and the will of the European population to survive the crisis together or fail separately. The first and most immediate challenge, now overcome, was the unanimous approval of the budget and the Eurobonds that had been proposed to pay for the trillion-euro plus relief and budgetary package.

Calling themselves the “Frugal Four”, Austria, Sweden, Denmark and the Netherlands early on indicated their opposition to Eurobond financing, though not to relief loans. Equal measures of pressure and concessions on budget rebates, though, prevented the unique one “no” vote sufficient to scuttle the whole package. To achieve this, some concessions had to be made on the Hungarian and Polish front, setting aside concerns over the rule of law and political differences.

It was certainly a relief to France and Germany at the start of the process, in spite of other regrets they may have, that a less than communal oriented UK is no longer a voting member. This is not an observation unique to us. In the May 30 edition of the UK weekly The Economist, one of their regular staff writers speculated that even under a Cameron government the UK would have vetoed the budget with Eurobonds and a relief package included. The unwieldiness of unanimous voting in a community of 27, not to mention 28 before the UK left, is clear when major reforms like this one are needed.

The second step for Merkel’s Presidency will be one over which she has no direct control: getting the budget through Parliament. There are issues with research and the Parliament will want to put their own stamp on things, but after compromises agreement is anticipated.

That brings us to the third issue for the six-month German Presidency: institutional reforms. A reform conference on the future of the Union that was scheduled to begin in May has been postponed sine die. The conference is needed and will in all likelihood be rescheduled. Will it be too much for Merkel to handle the pressing needs of the economic and health crisis as well as build consensus around further reform? Or will she see the crisis as an opportunity to push through an ambitious agenda?

Beyond German Leadership: EU Leaders to the Fore

Much of managing a 445 million member community is highly technical in nature. Leadership must demonstrate technical competence as well as personal character. Paying for the huge sums necessary to redress the economic and social issues caused by the virus will be an enduring problem. Christine Lagarde – though attacked for some early faux pas’s in initially addressing the crisis – has the experience and competence as well as character to do what is necessary at the European Central Bank.

No one can ignore the important role Donald Tusk, head of the European People’s Party in the European Parliament, can play. Of Polish (specifically Kashubian) origin, born in a working-class family in Gdansk, Tusk has taken upon himself the task of neutralising the populist political and cultural revolt. This will certainly be key to progress in a European federation, as populist parties have generally been determined nationalists rejecting federalism.

Another emerging leader is the head or the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats in the EU Parliament, Irate Garcia. She has already been responsible for several important portfolios, notably concerning women and the family, and will continue to play an important role.

Leadership will also emerge from beyond the institutions and from places we might not always expect. George Soros, head of the Open Society Foundation, an NGO founded and financed by him and working on supporting democratic institutions in Eastern Europe is no stranger to European finance. He is also the founder of the Central European University (CEU) recently forced, for having come afoul of the Hungarian Government, to move from Budapest to Vienna. Soros made his fortune, now used philanthropically, as an investor and speculator in currencies, stocks, and bonds. These are markets he knows well and the precise markets which will be needed to finance the Eurobonds. Soros has proposed a novel but not untried idea for low-cost financing of the crisis response: perpetual bonds.

Perpetual Bonds – A Radical Solution?

In 1648, Holland faced an existential threat from rising seawater. A Dutch Water Board issued the first “perpetual” bonds to pay for the building of a massive system of dikes. Now, 350 years later, the bonds are still paying interest to the remaining holders, but they have been forgotten by almost everyone else.

Similar bonds, also known as consols, have been successfully used for financing during several crises since the Dutch issuance. The first British Consols were issued in 1751. In 1927, under Prime Minister Winston Churchill, consols were issued again as partial refunding of the 1917 National War Bonds. The UK has a long history of using consols for financing.

The mechanism is simple: perpetual bonds pay interest but the principal is never repaid. Let’s say an investor buys a 10.000 euro perpetual bond at 1% interest – these bonds have been in the past subscribed to at very low interest rates because they pay in perpetuity. The holder would receive 100 euros per year for the rest of his life, at which time the bonds could be passed to his or her heirs. There is no end to this stream of 100 Euro income to the holder.

Perpetual bonds are less costly in the immediate future, the ideal feature in times of crisis when much money is required. However, they are considerably more expensive in the long run, though for the first 100 years or thereabouts depending on their interest rate they would be less expensive than an equivalent bond.

There are further ways that the costs can be curtailed over time. There is the natural attrition of bonds being lost with death and the transfer of estates. In times of inflation, payments become worth less in real terms naturally reducing their real cost. Costs can further be reduced by offering a buyout of remaining bonds, especially if inflation is such that return to the holders has diminished. This was the case with the 1751 British Consols which were bought out and retired in 2015.

One reason why more countries have not used consol financing is that, in order for the bonds to be subscribed to at a reasonable rate, the credit standing of the country must be good. This feature should appeal to the more frugal countries, as the issuance of such bonds will oblige the EU to keep its finances in order and revenues in line with expenditures. All in all, the proposal seems like an excellent way to provide low-cost Eurobonds in a time of crisis.

Where To From Here?

Spain has already proposed consols to the Council, but the proposal was not fully vetted as it came at a time when there was no agreement to use Eurobonds of any type, whether perpetual or ordinary term bonds. Now that has changed with the French and German proposal and Council approval of mutual Eurobonds backed by the credit of the EU.

The German Presidency will have to face these and many other issues and ideas. A new leadership, if not new leaders, will have to emerge to meet these huge challenges. It is difficult to be a leader today as 24/7 media coverage will eventually show off anyone’s foibles in a poor light. But make no mistake, there are real leaders. The question is not so much whether Europe will find the leaders it needs, nor the solutions to today’s challenges, but whether it will find the followers.

The post With the German Presidency Steering the Ship, Where Is EU Leadership Headed? appeared first on My Country? Europe..

The Beginnings: prehistoric populations

Homo Sapiens is thought to have emerged on the continent of Africa and migrated outward from there. The greatest gene variety is found among African populations. As the number of genetic mutations grows with time, this would place the oldest human population in Africa. Mutations like blue eyes – thought to have originated in the Baltics because of its greater frequency there – blond hair or light skin, emerged later among more isolated populations. These have not been isolated long enough, nor experienced enough different mutations, to constitute distinct races or species. Most of the human genome is found on the African continent in native populations. Indeed the mutation for white skin is found on an island populated by African migrants in the Indian Ocean even as it is widespread elsewhere. The original populations of Europe were thought to have dark skin, and frequently blue eyes.

Humanoids of various types were found outside of Africa – notably the Neanderthals in Europe and on the Asian steppes, and the Denisovans, largely in Asia. Little is known of their origins but Neanderthals met and interbred with Homo Sapiens. Today’s European genome has on average about 4% Neanderthal genes.

About 20,000 BCE, during the period of the “last glacial maximum”, much of Europe was covered with ice and uninhabitable. A warming period ensued which continues to this day, and small groups of people began to populate Europe in greater and greater numbers: Homo-Sapiens from the Middle East, and Neanderthal. This warming trend was interrupted by the “Younger Dryas” a period of cooling and re-glaciation in Europe around 12,000 BCE. Three “foyers” of habitation remained during the Younger Dryas: an area around what is now the Basque country, southern Italy, and South Western Russia. The population was forced to exit the rest of the continent by the ice and cold. After warming trends resumed about 10,000 BCE Europe was repopulated from these three areas as well as from the Middle East.

The end of the Mesolithic period, about 6,000 BCE, finds an indigenous hunter gatherer population in Europe. The development of agriculture in the Middle East created pressure on the land. This led to an exodus of hunter gathers from this region and later of farming populations themselves, looking for better land, into Europe. Indigenous Neanderthal had already become extinct after some inter-breeding with Homo Sapiens.

More prehistoric mingling

Resulting from these early migrations a European population with a high frequency of Semitic and Turkic genes from the Middle East is then found throughout Europe, except in the Baltics and northern regions where populations from the Russian “foyer” dominated. The situation continues with gradual modification by immigrants into Europe from the Russian steppes until the beginning of the Bronze age from 4,000 to 5,000 BCE. These new Indo-Aryan immigrants are part of the Indo-European language group, which also went Eastward and South from their original home on the Russian steppes into Northern India (Sanskrit) and Persia (Iran). The Germanic and later Slavic branches of the Indo-Aryans resettle the continent and either suppress or intermingle with the old-European populations.

Only in Southern Italy and Spain do the old European populations of Semitic and Turkic descent remain dominant, but this is to be reversed later in Spain with invasion by the Visigoths and in Italy, but only partially so, by the Lombards – both Germanic tribes. Italy was also the recipient of a Semitic Jewish immigration during the Jewish diaspora of the Roman period and remains to this day, especially in the South, somewhat distinct genetically.

The Indo-European influx leads to the Etruscan, Minoan and Mycenaean cultures, followed on by the Trojan, Greek and Roman civilizations in Europe and Asia minor.

A caveat is necessary here. Research on pre-historic populations, based initially on archeological finds and linguistics, has been recently supported by genetics. Though scientific in every sense this research remains somewhat speculative until much more evidence is available.

From here on out, our still relatively simple heritage becomes inexorably mixed with that of all surrounding regions and half the world. Ancient Egypt had close relationships with both Greek and Roman civilizations and those of the Middle East and Sub-Saharan Africa. Unknown populations called the Sea People invaded the Eastern Mediterranean during what is known as the “collapse of bronze age civilizations” and dominated for a time.

Wars, empires and plagues

After the historic civilizations of the region were rebuilt in the iron age, Carthaginians from North Africa, probably themselves Phoenicians, invaded Europe through France, Switzerland and over the Alps into Italy. Defeated by the Romans, they settled into southern Italy for decades before eventually being driven out.

On the borders of the Eastern Empire different people vied with Roman armies for dominance. Parthes (Indo-Iranians), Amazons, Saracens and eventually a Mongolian steppe tribe, the infamous Huns, all intermarried and took mates by force in the territories they conquered, leading to population mixtures difficult to quantify before modern genetics.

In addition to armies and invasions one can not underestimate the role of trade, cultural exchange and immigration in bringing populations together and modifying the European gene pool. A recent study of DNA extracted from remains of ancient Romans by Stanford University and Italian researchers found a remarkably high percentage of non-indigenous genetic material, leading researchers to conclude that the city was even more cosmopolitan than originally thought. But this was probably true of many of the cities of the Empire where most people lived.

Our readers will be somewhat more familiar with the admixture of European populations through trade, immigration, colonization and, of course, war in the period after the fall of the Roman Empire. Population bottlenecks leading to narrowing of the genetic pool like that of the Bubonic plague, or the destructive Thirty Years’ War may be less known for their demographic effects. Some of the more notable foreign influxes in the post Roman period include the Muslim invasions of the 8^th century, stopped by the Francs at Tours but remaining in control of Spain for more than half a millennium. The Moors brought an important Jewish migration from the Middle East in their wake.

The Mongols from across the great Asian steppes, eight time zones away, reached the Soja river in Hungary before turning back in 1241. The Turks in their turn reached the gates of Vienna before being turned back in 1683 and continued for centuries in the Balkans.

European ethnic groups themselves were inextricably mixed during the several millennia of the European project. The Vikings became Norseman and then Normans, invaded England, decimating the Anglo-Saxon nobility and changing the language from an exclusively Germanic tongue to one heavily influenced by Latin and French. Returning to whence they had recently come, they then fought the hundred years war in Western France, bringing a good bit of the now Anglo-Norman culture with them. Recent findings indicate an extensive Viking demographic presence, and not simply one of coastal marauders, in the previously largely Celtic gene pool of Ireland. Viking or Norman conquest went as far as Sicily where it is estimated that as much as 10 t0 20 percent of the population now has blond hair or blue eyes. Sicily was itself also subject to and heavily influenced by Arab conquests as were parts of the Italian peninsula and earlier by Phoenicians, Greeks and Romans.

Examples of the movements of European folk groups are too numerous to count: Slavs and Turks moved into the Balkans, Hungarians settled in Northwest Romania, Albanians in Italy, Greeks along the Italian coast. With these movements, cultural and physical intermingling always followed. The great European cities have always been international centers.

European colonizations around the world also resulted in considerable inter-mingling of populations with many former colonists and their offspring returning to Europe. Amerindian and French allies fought together against the British in North America. Black creole, originally from Africa, became products of French civilization, yielding in turn Europeans like Alexander Dumas (The Three Musketeers), Aimé Césaire (Discourse on Colonialism) and Leopold Senghor (French Academician) among their progeny. Some of these ex-colonies are now part of France.

Citizenship and Ethnicity

Surely even if European genetics is so diverse, citizenship or ethnic identity can define who is a European? Legally this is perhaps correct, at least as far as citizenship is concerned, and making exceptions for dual citizenship, but over time even this concept of “European” has proven elusive. The Romans originally granted citizenship to only propertied males of Rome. This was soon expanded as the empire grew. Rome granted citizenship to many conquered cities and provinces, many in Africa and Asia, but often only partial citizenship with much curtailed rights. For a time during the dark ages the idea of legal citizenship was replaced by feudal property laws and fealty to be supplanted later after the Renaissance by the ability of duchies and patented localities to determine who were their own citizens.

Later, nation states applied notions like ius soli and ius sanguinis to try to define and control their subjects. Today Ireland, Italy, Poland, Spain and Hungary offer citizenship under widely differing rules to individuals descending from a national forbearer (ius sanguini), even when they have never set foot in the country or speak a word of the language. Rules often do not require more than one grandparent to have been born or descended from someone born in the country.

France, Greece, Portugal, Spain and Germany (after 2000) offer limited ius soli under certain conditions, usually that in addition to the child one of the parents was born there, or the child waits until a certain age. The rules are as complicated as there are countries and have changed often.

Ethnicity is not much help either. Certainly speaking a European language or dialect is a clear marker of ethnicity, though non Indo-European languages like Finnish, Hungarian Estonian and Sami, all Finno-Ugric, and Euskara (Basque) are spoken within Europe. The Basque language Euskara may be the only language still spoken to have originated on the European continent prior to the introduction of Indo-European languages. These originated on the Russian steppe in Asia and are also spoken in India and Iran. Foreigners can also master both European language and dialects.

Not even common experience is all that helpful. An Albanian’s experience of the last century is totally different from an Englishman’s or Pole’s. Nor are European food and other ethnic traditions determinate. It would be hard to define a common European aspect to food and families retain these customs to differing degrees.

Is there a core set of European values? Not all Europeans would espouse any one set or even sub-set of values. Even Christian values disputed between Protestant and Catholic are honored more often in the breech.

Globalization is hardly new, the human race one large family. Genes, values, languages, music, dance and food all travel liberally. “European” is a project of human beings who call themselves Europeans and participate in what we call Europe. Other definitions do not stand scrutiny.

The post Who Is European? A History of Peoples and Movement appeared first on My Country? Europe..

England’s Premier League has received conditional backing to begin again in June under special protocols. The President of Spain’s La Liga, Javier Tabas, has identified June 12th as the earliest date to reopen behind closed doors and contingent on approval by Spanish health authorities. Prime Minister Sanchez upstaged him at time of writing, approving an opening date of June 8th. The 20 teams in Italian Serie A have agreed to resume play on June 13th in empty stadiums. Poland has plans to restart on May 29th, Portugal will resume on May 30th, Austria June 2nd.

Some leagues have closed and have no specific plans for re-opening. The Belgian league was the first to cancel. The French government has cancelled Ligue 1 and declared Paris St. Germain the winner on points. Some clubs are considering challenging the decision. The Dutch government has cancelled all sports until Sept. 1. In Scotland training, and match plays have been suspended.

A National Unifier

Sports is not just about entertainment or escapism, although those certainly play a big part. It’s also an outlet for political tensions, and it can inspire people from different backgrounds to see the value of cooperation. It also acts as a platform for national and international issues, playing a considerable political role. And in the case of football, it is a big one!

This is true on the national level, too, where sports have often been a national unifier, with national teams coming to serve as national symbols. Fans rally behind the national team in hopes of a victory over rival nations. When national teams meet Germany at the World Cup or European Championships, one has the impression that the war is being relived, without guns, in a more peaceful version of historic rivalries. Local rivalries are also played out when club teams meet in the Champions or Europa League.  For next year’s 2020-21 season, eligibility will be determined in cases where the season has already been cancelled, by the current league rankings.

In times of international stress, the role of sports is even more important. The 1936 Olympic Games in Germany are still talked about for this reason. The hostage-taking at the 1972 Munich Olympic games focused attention on the Middle East and the raised fists of two American athletes in 1968 at the Olympic games in Mexico solidified the black power movement in the US and gave it further impetus.

From May 1950 until a loss to Turkey on February 19, 1956, the Hungarian national team – the “magnificent Magyars” – amassed a 43 win 6 draw and 0 defeats record, with the sole exception of the 1954 World Cup loss to West Germany. The international prowess of their footballers was a source of pride to Hungarians as they prepared their unsuccessful 1956 revolt against the Soviet Union.  In 1980, many Western countries boycotted the Moscow Olympics after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.

The more recent French victories in the World Cup (1998, 2018) and the European Championship (1984, 2000), as well as making it to several semi-finals, have provided a platform for the country’s new multi-ethnic identity, as numerous immigrants from former French colonies helped lead the team to victory and were celebrated as national heroes. German and Italian teams that have vied for number one in Europe are said to play with their national character on their shirt sleeves, the well oiled “Mannschaft” being compared to the more individualistic “Azzurri.”

Spanish football was built by Franco at a time when the country didn’t agree on much else. It is still a source of pride and massive revenue. Iceland too achieved something remarkable. The “Strákarnir okkargetting” or “our boys” united the country and gave a boost to tourism by their quarter-final finish in the 2016 European Championship.

Players, Warriors, Princes, And Saints

Star football players are sportsmen- and -women first. They inspire us to run harder, train, and compete. They also play a much deeper psychological role modeling the warriors of old to inspire us in the social struggles we face, and parallels also tie them to ancient princes like the good King Wenceslas of Moravia doling out alms to the poor. Alongside benevolent ruler, the role of a saint, taking up the cause of the poor, although eschewing personal sacrifice, is not far behind. In taking on these various mantels, athletes reassure us of our good intentions, society’s smooth functioning, and the persistence of social cohesion.

Few will have trouble identifying Cristiano Ronaldo’s exploits on the field with those Homeric exploits of Ulysses – if, of course, in a way more fit for modernity. But somewhat less known, Ronaldo was “Most Charitable Sports Figure of 2019”, having achieved this number one ranking several times previously. Along with Maria Sharapova (#8), he is one of two Europeans to make the top ten charitable sports figure list. He is also better known throughout Europe than many presidents.  

Other charitable figures, features of the European sports scene, will be well-known to football fans: Neymar Jr. (#5), Didier Drogba, David Beckham, and Craig Bellamy, along with many others. One can question a system that awards some with fortunes they can give away while others struggle to make ends meet but it would be more difficult to question the generosity of these athletes. Unlike high finance, they have exploited no-one but themselves in amassing their fortune.

A figure like Zinedine Zidane, born in Marseille to Algerian parents, the hero of the French 2000 World Cup victory, and four-time Champions’ League victor as coach of Real Madrid, helps serve as a role model for immigrant kids, extending a feeling of common belonging in the immigrant community. Zidane also showed off the role of the saint – or in this case anti-saint – with his infamous headbutt of the Italian Marco Materazzi in the 2006 World Cup final that France went on to lose. Even the French were genuinely shocked. Materazzi had, it was said, insulted Zidane’s mother, raising the incident to another cultural level.

Other social conflicts are played out on the safer terrain of the turf as compared to the street. Families sometimes have divided club loyalties – one could imagine a Neapolitan family where one parent is a supporter of Inter Milan, the team representing the financial center of Italy. The other parent might root for Naples, identifying them as a team representing the city’s poor, and their offspring might join in the youthful enthusiasm for Juventus’ victories.  No football match will challenge the power structure in Italy, but football acts as an outlet to those tensions of identity and social cohesion.

When Sports Get Ugly

If sports has an outsized cultural influence, this does not always translate into a positive impact. Drugs, underage prostitution, illegal gambling, match-fixing, and right-wing passions are just some of the principal ugly moments in football that we hope not to see in the remainder of this Corona-truncated season. Teams have been forced before to play to empty stadiums, forgoing enormous revenues, not because of the virus but because of unruly, or even violent fans – even going so far as to violate European law against hate crimes or fascist symbols. Sanctions are applied by UEFA, football’s governing body in Europe.

Homophobic and racist chants, along with Nazi Swastikas, are often at the root of these bans, and often had to occur multiple times before punitive action was even considered. The problem is widespread. Groups called “ultras”, social clubs with several thousand members, and right-wing affiliations, are usually the prime movers in the repeated incidents. Some clubs are more infamous than others for their supporters’ continued far right affiliations – Lazio comes to mind – but no one is exempt. The German player Mesut Özil, who was born in Germany from Turkish parents, plays for Arsenal in the UK and retired from the German national team because of racism last year. Feyenoord, a Dutch team, was fined when fans threw a large inflatable banana at an AS Roma player of Ivorian origin. British fans, hooligans, known previously all over Europe for their drunken riots whenever they played on the continent, have now discovered racism towards many of the Commonwealth and other foreign players in the Premier League, as well as towards adversaries they play on the continent. Incidents of racism in Eastern European football are also commonplace.

It’s Go-Time

For better or worse, the season has begun again and will provide a needed distraction from days laden with news of the virus. Players will be no better or worse than we are – but their exploits will provide a window into European society, its strengths, and its weaknesses. It will fall upon us not to waste that moment of reflection, and make sure we try to do well by doing good: have fun, and change Europe for the better.

The post Football Is Back! Here’s How It Can Help Europe Bounce Back Against Covid-19 appeared first on My Country? Europe..