The EU is essential for Europe’s economy and freedom. It creates a common market of over 445 million people, providing unprecedented access to trade, investment and innovation. By promoting the free movement of goods, services and capital, the EU enables businesses to realize their potential, open up new markets and generate growth. The third F.A.Z. European Economic Conference in the ESMT in Berlin provides a platform for representatives of European business, politics and academia to discuss the role of the EU in promoting economic growth, social cohesion and sustainable development. The conference promotes relevant debates and solutions for a strong Europe. We invite everyone to get actively involved and shape the future of Europe together.

The F.A.Z. European Economic Conference provides a platform for high-caliber representatives of European business, politics and science to discuss the role of the European Union in promoting economic growth, social cohesion and sustainable development. The conference promotes relevant debates on current challenges and solutions for a strong Europe – in the year of the 2024 European elections, this discourse is more important than ever!

Prof. Harald James, from the Princeton School of Public & International Affairs, will open the EEC with a keynote speech on “Europe is stronger than we think”. Other guests are, among others, Friedrich Merz, Chairman of the CDU Germany and Chairman of the CDU/CSU parliamentary group in the Bundestag; Wolfgang Schmidt, Federal Minister for Special Tasks and Head of the Federal Chancellery; Peter Adrian, President of the German Chamber of Industry and Commerce, Dr Marie Jaroni, Head/SVP Decarbonisation, ThyssenKrupp Steel Europe AG,  and Günther H. Oettinger, President United Europe e.V.

Over the past decade, the Munich Cyber Security Conference (MCSC) has been a pivotal platform fostering global dialogue on cyber threats. From groundbreaking keynotes to collaborative workshops, MCSC has navigated the evolving landscape of digital security. The MCSC (15 February to 16 February) reflects at this milestone event on the next era of cyber resilience. #MCSCAnniversary

Please consult the MCSC Website for references of past editions including the conference report 2023.

United Europe is delighted to be once again a co-initiator of the second European Economic Conference in Berlin this year. How can we deliver on this promise permanently for Europe’s economy and society? This question will also be the central theme of the conference in 2023. This time, we want to find answers to how the climate-friendly transformation of the economy and society can be shaped despite inflation and how a threatening loss of prosperity can be mitigated, which tools help against dependence on global supply chains, how a new energy security policy can be financed in the EU, and which digital tools must be available in the transformation to a crisis-proof and more independent European economic area.

These questions surrounding the necessary economic transformation of Europe are at the heart of the second European Economic Conference on 14 and 15 June 2023 in Berlin. The conference will create a platform for high-calibre representatives from European business, politics, and academics, and will give key voices and relevant debates the space they deserve.

Invited guests are Dr Robert Habeck, Federal Minister for Economic Affairs and Climate Action, Lars Klingbeil, Party Chairman, SPD, Member of the Bundestag, Dr Magnus Brunner, Minister of Finance of the Republic of Austria and Dr Daniel Risch, Head of Government, Principality of Liechtenstein. and Günther H. Oettinger, President, United Europe.

Please find all other information about the program, speakers and registration under the following link.

We thank Gerald Braunberger, Publisher, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung and Jörg Rocholl, President, ESMT Berlin for their engagement and cooperation.

1. The U.S. has shown itself to be a resolute leader of the West and a ‘European power’. How sustainable is the closing of ranks?
2. The intention to make the EU a geopolitical power must take shape: through a powerful foreign policy and defence mechanisms against foreign economic coercion. Could Germany take the lead?

After a welcome note from Günther H. Oettinger, President of United Europe, we are delighted to announce Kurt Volker (Former US Ambassador, Distinguished Fellow, CEPA), Ljudmyla Melnyk (Researcher at Institut für Europäische Politik), Dr Josef Braml (Secretary-General, Trilateral Commission / German Group) and Iryna Stavchuk (Program Coordinator at the ECF and former Deputy Minister at the Ministry of environmental protection of Ukraine) as our panellists.

Cathryn Clüver Ashbrook, Exec Vice President/Senior Advisor, Bertelsmann Stiftung, will host our panel discussion.

Please confirm your attendance by sending an email to events@united-europe.eu.

“Is the European Union a guarantor of prosperity with an ecological, viable and sustainable economy? Not anymore! We have been, once, and Germany was a founding member. Think about Robert Schuman, Jean Monet, the Coal and Steel Community, the Single Market, and the EU enlargement. And today? Europe is in crisis. Europe is the demoted continent. Germany is in the middle of a recession with the highest inflation ever recorded in history.

We have an ECB which, in my opinion, has far too late realised, that it has one main task, namely monetary stability. Instead, the ECB flooded the market. The war came along unpredictably. But the flooded market and the low-interest rate policy – both give pause for thought. Normally, interest rates would have to be lowered now if they had been raised before! The European economy has since long ceased to be where we still think it is. Of the 100 largest companies in the world, the most important European company is the Swiss corporation Nestle – just outside the European Union. The German corporation’s SAP or Linde is somewhere between 100th and 120th place.

Europe – a guarantor? As far as I know, not anymore. We need a new success story for Germany and for the European Union. We need to build on innovation, growth, on a strategy that creates jobs and that helps to finance all this without permanently increasing the debt burden.

I’m not a mathematician, but I know the math doesn’t add up anymore. Our social systems are no longer sustainable. We urgently need a plan in Germany and Europe that is innovative and can also bring the continent back to the forefront in terms of economic policy and competitiveness. First and foremost, this has to do with education and lifelong training until the age of 70. Retirement at 70 should be the headline for the next decade. That, too, is a taboo no one wants to hear.

Another critical point is the topic of infrastructure and investments in rail, road, waterway, airway, and digital roads and all this has to happen in a coordinated way across borders.
Whose infrastructure is ready? Switzerland’s – with the highest costs per capita. Whose is not ready? The Germany’s!

The Germans are blocked in the realisation of infrastructure. This is evident in all the projects that are currently underway. Now we finally want to speed up the approval of two floating LNG terminals. We need that for every infrastructure of public interest. A speeding up of the legal process, a shortening of the procedures!

The guarantor of prosperity in the European Union is the single market. 430 million people, one standard, no borders, and freedom of movement for goods, commodities, and services. Germany is ultimately the pioneer when it comes to completing the internal market. The completion of the internal market is an important factor that costs nothing, only the goodwill of the Council, Parliament and Commission. Once we have a completed internal market, it is a question of opening up to the outside world with the implementation of various trade agreements. We have achieved a lot in recent years: agreements with Japan, South Korea, and Australia. But a lot is still on the table, many trade agreements have not yet been ratified, and Mercosur is blocked. Uruguay, Argentina, Paraguay and Brazil are growth countries. If Europe does not organise trade transatlantically, it will be organised pacifically, then this region will turn away towards Asia. RCEP should have been a wake-up call. 14 Asian countries, all not in friendship with China, some of them bullied by China like Australia or Japan, have concluded an agreement that means 30% of the world’s value-added volume. We must conclude trade agreements with countries in Asia and South America and finally understand that they do not tick 100% as we do. We will have to build massive agreements with the US. We have to move now. All these agreements must have priority in Brussels, but unfortunately also in the national parliaments. First and foremost in the German Bundestag.

Jean Claude Junckers coined the phrase ”Capability of World Politics‘  at the 54th Security Conference in Munich. Europe must become capable of global politics. Europe is not yet capable of being a decisive player on the world stage. Europe could be if we would act with one voice, speak with one voice. When it comes to energy policy, I would like to see not national ministers travelling to Qatar, Norway, and Algeria, but a European delegation. One Commissioner, and two ministers on a European scale. If we want to complete the internal energy market on a European scale, it makes no sense for 27 dwarfs to turn up in Qatar, curtsey and disappear. This means: divide et impera, divide and rule. Europe must no longer allow itself to be divided and dominated. It must present a united front to the outside world. Then we would finally have weight in this battle of systems between the USA, our partner and Asia.

A final, very topical thought. In the next few weeks, critical central decisions of interest to Europe will take place. On 16 October, the CPC Party Congress begins. There will be weeks of discussion, and in the end, Xi Jinping will be elected for another five years or for life. An autocrat regains power.

On 8 November there are mid-term elections in the USA. Then it will be decided whether Joe Biden, a friend of Europe and Germany, remains capable of acting in Congress in both chambers or is already a “lame duck”.

Then everyone will fly to Bali, where the G20, the conference of the world’s 20 powerful heads of state and government, will take place on 15 and 16 November. Many Europeans will be there. I would hope, and hope dies last, that Europe will speak with one voice after all. Italy, France, Germany, the UK, and the European Commission, coordinated with Washington DC, but not with orders from Washington DC. And with a clear message to Xi Jinping.

For never have we had such an abundance of crises as at present. We are not defenseless, but we are all very concerned about whether the European Union will hold in its unity. In addition to Russia’s war against Ukraine, there is the threat of an escalation of China against Taiwan. Actually, we democrats should know that dictators can be taken at their word. If our grandparents had read “Mein Kampf”, we would have known Hitler and his true intentions earlier.

If we had taken Putin’s talk seriously in 2001, we would have known more about Crimea, the Donbas and the terrible war that Putin is now to blame for. Xi Jinping is also talking straight. He says he wants to take Taiwan in this decade. Are we taking him seriously? What will happen if Xi Jinping turns Taiwan into a West Berlin, i.e. cuts it off or, even worse, bombards it with missiles? Then the Americans will have to decide whether Biden’s word is good. Then aircraft carriers would land there and the Americans would invite us to join in. But how is that supposed to work if the Bundeswehr helicopters fly at most as far as Warsaw? Then the Americans would invite us to adopt sanctions. And it’s clear that sanctions like those against Russia do have an effect. And China is dependent on technology from Europe and the USA. But the sanctions don’t affect Bulgaria, Estonia or Malta. They hit the German business model.

We must have an interest in preventing a China-Taiwan escalation. We must have an interest in Xi Jinping not stopping his economic development like Putin and gaining land as a tsar, but in Xi Jinping giving priority to the prosperity and well-being of his people. For this, he needs the world. For this, he needs technologies from Europe and the USA for a limited period of time.

Bali is the right place to make this clear with one voice. And Bali is the right time for this. Only Europe has the ability to maintain our prosperity internally, in the internal market, for research, for freedom of movement, and for our image of humanity. And Europe can gain authority externally as a united whole – something that is not possible for 27 individual member states.

Please find under the following link all the contributions of the European Future Conference.

We would like to thank Mr Günther H. Oettinger, Mr Gerald Braunberger, the publisher of the F.A.Z., the team of the F.A.Z conferences and the colleagues of the ESMT for the joint organisation of the first EEC in Berlin on 26th and 27th of September in Berlin,

“If Europe speaks with one voice, then Europeans could live in happiness, in prosperity and without borders.” Winston Churchill already knew what a united Europe could mean for Europeans. All the more important was this first joint conference, the European Economic Conference (EEC) on the future of Europe, United Europe initiated in partnership with the F.A.Z. and the ESMT (European School of Economics) on 26 and 27 September in the historic former Council of State building in Berlin.

Europe sees itself confronted with a number of existential challenges not seen in decades. Are topics such as digitalisation and climate protection still a priority at the moment? How does Europe achieve new, value-based sovereignty in the face of changing geopolitical tensions? What is the status quo of the Single Market and the European Economic Area?

“Europe will be forged in crisis, and will be the sum of solutions adopted for those crises.” This formula was used by Jean Monnet (1888-1979), the most significant founding father of the EU, to describe the logic of European integration. It is always quoted when the process is challenged. This is also the case today.
The EEC discussed possible solutions to crises together with Dr Anton Hofreiter, Chairman of the Committee on European Union Affairs, The Greens, Christian Lindner, Federal Minister of Finance, FDP; Heli Tiirmaa-Klaar, Director, Institute for Digital Society, ESMT; Adonis Georgiadis, Minister for Development and Investment in Greece, Klaus Regling, Managing Director at European Stability Mechanism, Siegfried Russwurm, President of the Federation of German Industries, Daniel Gros, Director of the Brussels think tank “Centre for European Policy Studies” (CEPS); Prof. Dr B. Jacobs, Professor of Public Economics, School of Business and Economics, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Netherlands; Maria Röttger, CEO & President, Michelin Europe North; Kimon Zorbas, Head of Public Affairs, DATEV eG and the participants.

Dr Anton Hofreiter, Chairman of the Committee on European Union Affairs, expressed concern that Europe is no longer able to deal with all the crises at once. After all, one crisis does not disappear because another is more pressing: “When we think of Ukraine, we have made mistakes as a society and as the previous government. The hope of finding a diplomatic way with Russia was false. We were wrong, the Eastern Europeans were already right in 2014. They were right in 2008 and they were right about Chechnya. We have been too weak against autocracies and dictators. We didn’t want to see the development of Russia and China in the last few years. If we want to make Europe more capable of acting, we as Germany must assume our leadership role. Leadership does not mean pushing through German interests but rather using Germany’s power in Europe’s interest and implementing European interests.

Siegfried Russwurm, the President of the Federation of German Industries, predicted what’s in store for Europe and whether there is enough energy in the EU this winter. Russwurm’s foresight is rather bleak: “There will be just enough energy in Germany. It will crunch but not on a large scale however in some corners it will be very difficult. Fatalism is not a trait of entrepreneurs. It is remarkable how many companies are considering relocating their businesses abroad. Let’s not kid ourselves.”

Federal Finance Minister Christian Lindner explained the German positions and his financial policy-making, on which not only Germany’s but Europe’s stability depends: “About ten years ago, I met Hans-Dietrich Genscher, for a series of talks in preparation for a joint book (“Brückenschläge”, 20213). It was about the importance of Europe and the European peace process. I said, Mr Genscher, after all, you can’t base the benefits of Europe on peace alone, peace is what we have! What a mistake: now we are at war again on European territory.”I am very concerned about macroeconomic developments. The expansionary fiscal policy over the past years has contributed to record-high inflation in Germany and Europe. Inflation is the greatest threat to our economic foundation in Europe. We must respond to the challenge as a matter of urgency – in the monetary union and in the European Union.”

Kerstin Andreae, Chairwoman of the Executive Board and Member of the Presiding Committee of the BDEW reassured the protection and support of gas importers: “In a chain where we have an importer, an energy supplier, an intermediary and a customer, we cannot let the importer down. That would lead to an uncontrollable domino effect. The Russian gas dependency is something we are all to blame for, collectively.”

Under the following link, you can have a look at all the contributions of the European Economic Conference.

We thank the publisher of the F.A.Z., Mr Gerald Braunberger, the F.A.Z. conference team and our colleagues at ESMT for jointly organising the first EEC in Berlin on 26 and 27 September 2022.

These questions surrounding the future of Europe will be the focal point of the 1st European Economic Conference on 26.-27. September 2022 in Berlin. The conference will create a platform for high-calibre representatives from European business, politics, and academics, and will give key voices and relevant debates the space they deserve. The following speakers will discuss with you the current status of the European Economic Area and potential scenarios for the future: Christian Lindner, Federal Minister of Finance, Germany, Aušrinė Armonaitė, Minister of Economy and Innovation, Lithuania, Nadia Calviño, Minister for Economy and Digitalization, Spain, Dr Anton Hofreiter, Chairman of the Committee for European Union Affairs, Bündnis 90/Die Grünen, Lars Klingbeil, Co-Chair, SPD, Heli Tiirmaa-Klaar, Director, Digital Society Institute (DSI), ESMT Berlin, Siegfried Russwurm, President of the Federation of German Industries (BDI), Günther H. Oettinger, President of United Europe e.V.

In collaboration with United Europe and the ESMT (European School of Management and Technology), the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung invites you to get involved in the dialogue about the future of Europe and to join influential figures in European public life in intensive discussion to create momentum for a strong Europe.

The main day of the conference will be complemented by an exclusive pre-event evening, which will enable direct discussion between speakers and selected conference participants during an inspirational supporting programme.

The conference will be held in German.

Please find the preliminary programme under the following link.

• Jean-Pierre van Aubel, EEAS Expert in Defence Policy and Strategy
• Heli Tiirmaa-Klaar, Director of the Digital Society Institute, ESMT Berlin, Ambassador-at-Large for Cyber Diplomacy and Head of the Cyber Diplomacy Department at the Estonian Ministry of Foreign Affairs
• Prof. Dr Markus Kaim, Senior Fellow, International Security, SWP
• Moderator: Rieke Schües, Managing Director, United Europe

Highlights of the discussion

Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, emphasised in her greeting quoted by Günther H. Oettinger that Putin’s aggression against Ukraine confirmed the need for and the timeliness of the Strategic Compass. Since the end of February, several Member States have announced new and substantive investments in defence. Leaders have committed to devote an additional 200 billion euros to defence capabilities over the coming years. Europe needs not only to spend more on its defence but also to spend better and together. Not only through joint research and development for defence, but also through joint procurement. Fragmentation and duplication are the enemies within. Investments worth 200 billion euros can unlock new economies of scale for our defence industry, leading to lower costs, more focused investments and greater capacity to meet rising demand in defence. More than ever before, the defence of Europe requires the Member States of our Union to act together.

Bodo Lehmann, Head of the Representation of the State of Baden-Württemberg to the European Union in Brussels outlined, that a coherent and cohesive European security and defence policy remains a challenge. A couple of weeks ago, on the 21st of March this year, the European Council approved the so-called Strategic Compass. A new strategy that high representative Josep Borell described as a turning point for the European Union as a security provider. The European Union needs to come to decision-making procedures with qualified majorities and a common EU foreign policy. The Strategic Compass can be a useful starting point for a stronger and more self-confident European Union.

Günther H. Oettinger, President of United Europe, emphasised that history proceeds by slow evolution and sudden accelerations. This is also true for European defence. Our cooperation on defence matters has intensified – slowly but steadily – for several years now. The Strategic Compass is conceived as a step in that process. The European Union should do more for its eastern neighbours, Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia. The war these days is old-fashioned. It’s about the weapons of the last century. The next war against Europe will come from digital technologies and Europe is not sufficiently prepared for this. This makes today’s discussion on the Strategic Compass all the more important.

Jean-Pierre van Aubel, an EEAS Expert in Defence Policy and Strategy, explained that the Strategic Compass provides for the first time in European history a threat analysis. The war in Ukraine, energy security, food security, the consequences of climate change, regional conflicts, and cyber-attacks are threatening the European Union. The threat analysis is the basis of the Strategic Compass demanding a more comprehensive answer than Europeans are used to. The crisis will not go away, and the European Union needs to be prepared and able to act. In addition, the 81 action plans of the Strategic Compass need to be financed. How do we counter cyber attacks, how can we guarantee access to strategic domains at sea but also in space? The European Union needs to invest in the operational sector, but the Europeans shouldn’t just spend more money, they should spend their money better. The current crisis has made one thing clear: The European Union is still too dependent on others. These days, everyone is talking about European dependencies on Russia. But the dependence on China is many times higher. To strengthen strategic autonomy, the EU should act together with its partners, e.g. strengthen cooperation with NATO, the United Nations and the OSCE. To ensure that the measures adopted by the Strategic Compass are put into practice, the member states have agreed to report to the highest level of the European Council on their progress.

Dr Markus Kaim, a Senior Fellow in the Security Policy Research Group, SWP, would have liked to hear more about the future of US-EU relations in security and defence. “The emphasis is on US-EU relations because we tend to focus exclusively on NATO. And that would be my next question: How do we have to imagine an independent EU? I think that’s one of the homework assignments that European governments need to reflect on. The European Union is interested in becoming an effective security provider. What we desperately need here is political reform. Even if the EU will be equipped with capabilities, the question remains: Who will decide on the use of military means in the future?”

Heli Tiirmaa Klaar, Head of the Cyber Diplomacy Department at the Estonian Ministry of Foreign Affairs outlined, that the EU has many gaps in their defence capabilities. What needs to be done is to close those gaps in the real hard defence capabilities. And I’m glad to hear that there are 81 action plans by the EAS to do this. In the Ukraine war, we have to show strength and power. And it doesn’t matter whether it’s the conventional military or it is the cyber offensive. We have to show some teeth. And this is what Russia is afraid of. Russia is not afraid of our thoughts, prayers or any other humanitarian action. So we have to show strength and power. I think we have quite a good focus on the fight against disinformation. We have had many directives, regulations and other regulatory documents in the last ten years. However, our capabilities still need to improve significantly in the future. The Strategic Compass does not compete with NATO’s objectives.

The complete statement from Ursula von der Leyen is available under the following link  Strategic compass.

We thank our panellists for the engaging discussion. A warm thank-you also goes to our cooperation partner, the Würth Group, especially to Ms Schily and Ms Rau for their great cooperation, and to the staff of the Representation of the State of Baden-Württemberg to the European Union in Brussels.

United Europe co-organised the panel discussion „A New Generational Contract: Visions for Business, Politics and Society“.

Panellists:

• Mamphela Ramphele, Co-President of the Club of Rome
• Claudia Plakolm, State Secretary for Youth, Austria and chairwoman of the ÖVP
• Friedrich Merz, Member of the German Bundestag, leader of the CDU parliamentary group
• Moderator: Prof. Christoph Frei, Political scientist, publicist and since 2006 Professor for the history of political ideas at the University of St. Gallen

Highlights of the discussion:

Prof. Christoph Frei: Ms Ramphele. Where do you currently see the greatest challenge with the view to intergenerational equity and fairness?

Mamphela Ramphele: I’ would like to start by quoting a fellow Club of Rome Member, Roman Krznari. In his book „The Good Ancestor“ he identifies what he calls the pathology of short-termism as the greatest threat we are leaving to the next generation. This short-termism is displayed fully in how we overconsume with little regard for the next generations. But also how politicians just look at the next polls making choices they know that they are not good for the next generations. Same thing with business. With an eye on the share price, they make decisions which are not in the interest of the future.

Indiginalised wisdom that is still embraced by many in the world embodies the privileging of intergenerational co-responsibilities as the core element of philosophies. Women in particular are trusted with keeping the seed. This reference for life gets passed on from one generation to another. Humanity is being challenged with multiple planetary emergencies because we do have not this wisdom. This has to do with our willingness to change our mindsets. And that’s not impossible because we are all born with an innate capacity for learning how to be human in a new way.

Prof. Christoph Frei: Mr Merz, if I may repeat that question: Where do you currently see the major challenge with the view to intergenerational equity?

Friedrich Merz: My first point is that we are seeing the beginning of a new world order in terms of how this war in Ukraine is changing our entire framework of doing politics. This war is more than just a local event in the eastern part of Europe. It changes our complete political order. We are seeing a new global distribution of power politically, militarily and economically. Two powers on earth are already identified: The United States of America and China. The open question is: Where will be the European position, the African position, the Pacific Area position and where will be the Russian position? The weakest player in this present politically is the European and we are wondering where we should go in terms of European unity and strength to provide our work to this new political order.

I fully agree with what Mamphela Ramphele said at the very beginning: We are suffering the pathology of short-termism. How can we overcome this issue? If we are not willing to reduce consumption and to increase spending and investments then we will not be able to resolve the problems. This includes our pension systems and I give you one number: More than 1/4 of our federal budget in Germany is spent every year to subsidise the pensions system. That’s why I’m focussing on the spending and the budget. This includes investments in infrastructure and investments in education. And that is what we are lacking here in Germany. And my observation is that we are lacking in many other parts of the European Union.

Prof. Christoph Frei: Thank you, Friedrich Merz. I may assure you that we have the same situation in Switzerland. Claudia Plakolm: Where do you see the greatest challenges when it comes to this issue of intergenerational fairness?

Claudia Plakolm: I just want to underline what Friedrich Merz has said. It’s not just only a challenge in Germany or Switzerland, we also have this big challenge in Austria and many other European countries. Intergenerational fairness poses a lot of challenges for many governments all over the world. One of the most pressing issues in our welfare state is to create a sustainable and fair pension system. And let me give you one example from Austria: In 1970 the average Austrian was retired for 8 years and nowadays the average Austrian is retired for 22 years. That brings many challenges, not only financial challenges but also topics like age loneliness.

Another aspect is that current times confront a key narrative which is long underpinned in society: the key narrative that each successive generation would become better than the generation before. In past, we have an implicit contract and an intergenerational agreement which says, that future societal needs should be met. We have Climate change as a big issue, we have worth conditions on our public budgets, and we have the technological change. And it shows us that we have to put the young generation at the centre of this discussion and talk more openly about intergenerational fairness.

Prof. Christoph Frei: Dr Ramphele: I like to confront you with something Friedrich Merz said: “The war in Ukraine changes everything.” I wonder, how that resonates with you. To bring us back to this topic here, to the intergenerational equity, after all, on the African continent demographics are slightly different from what we see in Europe. Young people do makeup society in Nigeria. The median age at this point is 18 years. So the intergenerational issue must be a different one in African societies. Could you elaborate on that?

Mamphela Ramphele: First on the war in Ukraine: There is a saying in African culture: “When the elephants fight, the grass suffers“. This is a global challenge. Africa cannot stand outside. But I also would like to call the wisdom of one of our good ancestors, Desmond Tutu: “There can not be neutrality when an elephant is standing on the tail of a mouse.” And so we have to address the war in Ukraine as an entire human package.

I come back to the issue of demographics. Yes, Africa is blessed with one of the youngest populations, but Africa is also cursed with the oldest median age of its leadership. This mismatch doesn’t work! And this is the aftershock of the colonial conquest. And so for us, on the continent, the challenge is, how to relearn the wisdom of intergenerational shifts in leadership. The eldest are respected not because there are running but because of stepping beside so that the young people can bring the wisdom and the creativity needed in each new challenging era.

Yesterday we have listened to the former minister of trade and industry from Botswana, Bogolo Kenewendo, one of the youngest politicians in her country. She transformed Botswana’s registrational businesses from 49 days to less than 7 days. Why? She’s not afraid of change, not afraid to explore the unexplored. But we have also heard yesterday from Switzerlands President Ignazio Cassis who challenged the young people: „Don’t wait for my generation to do things to prepare for your future. No. You are the changemakers, you are the ones who have to seize the moment. Each generation must find its mission.” My plead to the young people in this room and elsewhere on the globe and particular on the African continent is to repeat what President Cassis said: „We need a revolution!“ A revolution of mindset so that we can see the benefits of the wisdom of interconnectivity and interdependence.

Prof. Christoph Frei: Where do we start changing mindsets? How do we go about changing mindsets?

Mamphela Ramphele: The beauty of mindset changing is that we don’t need a school. It’s a question of having conversations in safe spaces where ever you are. It starts with challenging yourself. We at the Club of Rome are proposing that the only way we can emerge from these multiple planetary emergencies is to be willing to learn again, to learn how to be human again. Those conversations should be taking place in every community, in every business, in every government, cabinet, and in every parliament so that we always can ask ourselves: Is this really a good decision to make if we are thinking about the new generations?

Prof. Christoph Frei: Let’s go back to you, Friedrich Merz and to more subjects, you have been emphasising for a long time and that is budgetary responsibility, and financial sustainability For you the issue of intergenerational equity has a lot to do with how much we earn and how much we spent. Do you stick to what you say?

Friedrich Merz: Yes, I stick to that what I’ve said. But this is not austerity! This is in my view fiscal discipline to have enough room for spending on investments and education. So my plea or my idea is, that we should come back to what has helped us in the past and what will help us in the future. You might have heard that our chancellor created the word „Zeitenwende“. But what does that mean if we take that seriously? „Zeitenwende“ means, that we have to change almost everything within our priorities. And that is my point. To set up new priorities means that we have things or ideas or projects which are extremely important and that is of course defence but also education, infrastructure and investments, but behind that, we find consumption and subsidising our pension system. So that is what I mean. It’s not austerity, it’s just fiscal discipline to create enough room for spending on new priorities. This is not the politics of austerity! This is the right opposite of that, it’s the politics of being able to invest. And that is what we have to do in most European member states including Germany, Austria and others.

Prof. Christoph Frei: Claudia, tell us, what could be done to make that intergenerational dialogue really engaging?

Claudia Plakolm: The problem is the demographic element. We have a big challenge to give the young generation a voice also in decision making. In Austria, we are some kind of frontrunner, since we implemented 15 years ago the voting age at 16. We are one out of two European countries, the other one is Malta. It has a big impact on politics because politicians focus more on the young generation, they put youth politics in their programmes. What consequences has a law on children and young people concerning financial issues or environmental issues? We should not divide the generations, we should collaborate.

Prof. Christoph Frei: Friedrich Merz: With you as a political leader would we see an ageing vote in Germany coming down to 16?

Friedrich Merz: This is part of the political programme of the German government and will be negotiated in a broader framework of our election system which has to be changed fundamentally. The court of the constitution urges us to reform our election system more or less completely. And that’s the reason why I can’t give you an answer yet. I very much hope that we will be able to do that this year.

We thank the organisers of the St. Gallen Forum and our panellists for the deeply interesting and lively discussion.
Please find the full recording of the panel discussion here (01:18:10).

In March, the European Council approved the “Strategic Compass”, a 50-page strategy paper for European defence and security policy. The Strategic Compass aims to provide answers to security threats and geopolitical dynamics and to path the way for a common EU security and defence policy in the coming years.

The EU plans to build up a joint intervention force of 5,000 soldiers by 2025, to better coordinate armament projects and to harmonise the military budgets of the member states. Will the EU be able to pool its resources better? Will the EU be able to react decisively to the security crises?

The expert round takes place in Brussels at the Representation of the State Baden-Württemberg to the European Union, Rue Belliard 60/62, 1040 Brussels. From 18:00 hrs onwards, you are welcome to stay for a reception with informal discussions and a flying buffet.

If you’re interested in participating please register here.

We look forward to your participation and a lively discussion!

Among the speakers are the CISOs of Apple, Audi, and Google, as well as the heads of various international cybersecurity authorities such as BSI, NCSC, Interpol, and CISA. As guests of honor we expect Lisa Monaco, US Deputy Secretary of Justice, her counterpart Georg Eisenreich as well as Margaritis Schinas, EU Vice President and responsible Commissioner for the Security Union. We are also pleased to welcome Four-Star General David Petraeus.

The event will be live-streamed on the website of the Munich Security Network. Further information on the programme and the speakers can also be found on the website

In addition to the live programme, you will also find interviews with outstanding experts from the European Space Agency (ESA), Airbus and Intel, among others, on the website.

We thank you for your interest and look forward to seeing you on Thursday at the Digital Edition of the MCSC.

The European Union’s climate objectives are challenging and so are the effects of global climate change. To reduce CO2 emissions, the European Commission wants to introduce the Carbon Border Act. But how will this concept work in practice? What are the advantages, but also what are the disadvantages? “Climate initiatives are predominantly political campaigns where it is not clear how they can be achieved” stated Manfred Kurz, Head of the Würth representative offices in Berlin and Brussels. According to Mr Kurz, engineers, physicists, process engineers, product designers and marketing departments of companies will contribute most to climate goals in future. But first the issue has to be depoliticised. As the European Commission is now deeply invested in debt policy, compensation will come through taxation and for Mr Kurz the Carbon Border Act means exactly that: taxation.

Günther H. Oettinger, former European Commissioner and President of United Europe emphasized that Climate Change has to be the priority and that we should be both ambitious and realistic: “We must ensure not to destroy our industrial cause by violating the level playing field.” Europe is no longer in the lead when it comes to industrial high-tech production and faces tough competition from China and India on the one hand and the US on the other hand. A balanced policy is needed: “We have to avoid carbon leakage. The Carbon Border Act is so complex and bureaucratic, nobody will understand it.” Europe needs commodities such as steel, aluminium, cement and copper and should be able to produce these inside the EU and not to import them from abroad. The proposed Carbon Border Act will increase the costs of commodities produced in the EU thus make them less competitive. We also have to avoid trade war and isolation: Europe needs the export markets.

Dr Martin Schneider, CEO Verein Deutscher Zementwerke, pointed out, that it can’t be a one size fits all solution: As a CO2 intensive commodity, Cement is contributing 6-7% of all global emissions. Some sectors are more subject to carbon leakage than others and certainly cement is affected by carbon leakage from the very early stage on. The cement market is highly price sensitive and our industry is already heavily impacted by imports to Europe from the Middle East, North Africa and Turkey. “The Carbon Border Adjustment may work once we have a global carbon border market but until then the carbon border act remains difficult. Regulation has to be non discriminatory and that is the key.” We will be able to cope with these ambitious climate targets by developing our technical leadership but we need the carbon leakage protection until we have established a global carbon market.

David Boublil, Deputy Head of Unit “Other Indirect Taxes” in DG Taxation and Customs for the European Commission stated, that In combination with the ETS (Emission Trading Scheme) the Carbon Border Act is centered on its climate objective, compatible with WTO rules. The idea is not to punish anyone but rather to conduct efficient policy. “We need an effective carbon price and the Carbon Border Act may contribute to that.”

Dr Alice Pirlot, Research Fellow in Law at the Oxford University Centre for Business Taxation stressed: “The Carbon Border Act is not simple but climate change is not simple either. If we see climate change as a top priority then we need to find a solution. If that is the only solution we have at the moment then we have to deal with its complexity. Most of the environmental policies are quite complex because the issues are complex.” In order to solve the issues on EU and global level, counterproposals have to be developed.

Please find here the video recording of the discussion.

In his welcoming address, Prof. Bodo Hombach referred to the fragility of the Western alliance: If Trump – as President of the leading superpower – declares NATO obsolete as well as democracy and the rule of law are dismantled in individual member states, then one has to wonder whether the “case for the alliance” might not ultimately become a “trap for the alliance”. Referring to his own background, he reminded on his work for the Stability Pact for South Eastern Europe. With regards to peace work in the Balkans, he blamed NATO for a lack of coordination, efficiency and seriousness. Hombach, who identified security as the most elementary of all basic needs, said that one has to be prepared for peace and handed over to Sigmar Gabriel.

Gabriel started with a reference to the question mark in the event title. There are three reasons why NATO’s ability to act is called into question: First, the strategic reorientation of the United States, whose focus has shifted from Russia to China. Secondly, the vague view of the “enemy”. While the lines of demarcation were clear during the Cold War, China, for example, is now both antagonist and economic partner. And third, the doubt about the Alliance’s defence capabilities, especially those of its largest partner, the United States. This doubt is much more dangerous for the Alliance than financial, material or personnel deficiencies. For political cohesion the ability to secure peace is decisive. He highlighted the difficult relationship with Turkey, which he described as “frenemy”, as well as the isolationism of the United States, which is increasingly withdrawing from its former role as the world‘s policeman.

In the panel discussion that followed, Ambassador Ekkehard Brose also noted the USA’s lack of leadership. Against this background, his diplomatic colleague Dr. Hans-Dieter Lucas raised the question of how Europe would like to position itself within the alliance in future: “NATO is the only framework for collective defense. But we need a substantial European contribution.”

Gabriel, too, is convinced that the military coordination of the alliance is working, but that Europe’s political positioning is lacking. Brose agreed with this, adding that Europe has to take bold action. Furthermore, the EU is the more suitable actor for specific challenges compared to NATO. NATO is a military actor, but in many southern crisis regions the challenges are structural in nature. Here, however, there is a much greater need in terms of development policy and civil society.

Commenting on the difficulties in dealing with Turkey, Gabriel stressed that Turkey should not be pushed out of NATO – since NATO is the last anchor against nuclear armament. Hans-Dieter Lucas also feels that ambiguities have to be dealt with. It is important to find a balance between dialogue and criticism.

The event took place in cooperation with United Europe and the Brost Foundation on 2rd March at the Bonner Akademie für Forschung und Lehre praktischer Politik (BAPP) in Bonn.

In this unpredictable current context, the Bonn Academy for Research and Teaching of Practical Politics (BAPP) asked the question “Russia – Is it time for a New Dialogue?” during a panel discussion on the evening of the 27th February, with obvious controversies between journalist and Russia expert Golineh Atai on one side, and Matthias Platzeck (Chairman of the German-Russian Forum) and Ronald Pofalla (Chairman of the Petersburg Dialogue) on the other side.
There was still a broad consensus on the “whether” a dialogue should take place when BAPP President Professor Bodo Hombach warned: “Diplomacy is not a fair-weather event at a champagne reception, it is disaster control. It was created as a key to advance politics.”

In the debate, moderated by Anja Bröker, former foreign correspondent of the ARD in Moscow, the proposals were diametrically opposed when it comes to “how” a dialogue should take place. Pofalla spoke in favour of continuing close cooperation. He said that Germany and Russia were dependent on each other, particularly in regards to the North Stream 2 Baltic Sea pipeline: “Without Russian gas as a transitional energy source we will not be able to manage the energy transition for which school students here take to the streets on Fridays”.

Golineh Atai sharply criticised Germany’s dealings with its neighbours to the east as a result of events in the recent past. “It always takes two sides for a dialogue,” said Atai. “But since 2014, the other side has become increasingly closed and speaks a language of refusal.”

Since the annexation of the Ukrainian Crimea to the Russian Federation in 2014, which is today still regarded by Europe as an annexation against international law, a bloody war has been raging in Eastern Ukraine between Russian and Ukrainian armed forces. At the end of 2018, the UN estimated the number of casualties at around 30,000. In the Syrian war Putin now supports the potentate Assad above all with his strong air force. In addition, the Russian side is completely ignorant of international law: in 2019 a young Georgian was murdered in the middle of Berlin, and according to numerous indications the alleged murderer is said to have acted on behalf of the Russian state. Chancellor Angela Merkel nevertheless travelled to Moscow in January for talks with Putin, accompanied by Foreign Minister Heiko Maas. Does Germany show too much weakness and too little rigour towards Russia? For Russia expert Atai there is no doubt: She considers a relationship on an equal footing with the Russian government to be increasingly difficult, as the latter has begun to define itself as “the opponent” vis-à-vis the West. Atai: “I am of course in favour of cooperation. But cooperation for cooperation’s sake is unfortunately not always Russia’s priority.”

Matthias Platzeck vehemently disagrees: “The fact that someone has a different point of view should be a stronger call for dialogue.” The politician warns not to confront Russia with a raised forefinger, he advises patience instead of isolation from Russia. Platzeck: “We should look ahead with foresight and not demand that the Russians have to be like us tomorrow.”

Atai, on the other hand, considered the question of how to classify repressive measures against the Russian civilian population, of which there had been over 50 during Putin’s third term of office alone. Moreover, according to Atai, the president’s popularity ratings had reached a historic low of 35 percentage points.

Here the debate has come full circle towards consensus. Pofalla, too, sees the Putin era as the twilight of the gods, and the time after is already casting shadows: “I have had the opportunity to meet some impressive personalities in the Russian parliament who give me hope.” Platzeck adds: “A more liberal faction has formed behind Putin. It has recognised that social and environmental issues and the new demands of Russia’s younger generation must be taken into account if national society is to be won over.”

Pofalla’s clear conclusion: “One can certainly hope that after Putin there will be someone who wants to change the country for the better!”

The event took place in cooperation with United Europe and the Brost Foundation on 27th February at the Bonner Akademie für Forschung und Lehre praktischer Politik (BAPP) in Bonn.

On the occasion of its 70th birthday, a founding member declared the Western military alliance as “brain dead”. The calculated provocation of French President Emmanuel Macron was followed by a demonstrative closing of ranks by the other 28 members at the NATO summit in London. Even US President Donald Trump, a latent critic of the organization, attested it a “good job” and at the same time pleaded for the expansion and admission of Middle Eastern states.
In response to numerous current challenges, the members of the “North Atlantic Treaty Organisation” (NATO) now want to spend around 100 billion more on armaments in 2020: The USA (in Iraq) as well as Turkey (in Syria) risk an escalation of internationally effective conflicts with consequences for the other member states by going it alone. TThe missile upgrade against Russian cruise missiles announced by NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg revives the Cold War scenario again. China is now said to have nearly 2,000 ballistic missiles and cruise missiles.
Where does the Atlantic defence alliance really stand? And what role should Germany play in it in future?

The event is organised by the Bonner Akademie für Forschung und Lehre praktischer Politik (BAPP) in cooperation with United Europe and Brost Foundation and takes place at Heussallee 18 – 24, 53113 Bonn.