On 11 September 2012, the European PeacebuildingLiaison Office organised a roundtable discussion atQuaker House Brussels on ‘the European Union as aPeace Project: Defending, learning from and applyingour history’. Martina Weitsch spoke on ‘Reviving theidea of Europe as a peace project: challenges forpeace activists’:William Penn, a very early Quaker, who established agovernment based on peace in Pennsylvania, wrote anessay in 1693 entitled ‘an essay towards the presentand future peace of Europe’. This was a reaction tothe wars then raging in Europe. His idea was inessence that the representatives of the various entitiesthen making up Europe were to meet regularly todiscuss and resolve any disagreements; he envisagedsanctions that could be applied toany of them if they either failed tobring such disagreements beforethese meetings or who failed toimplement the decisions in atimely manner. It was a documentof its time. But it was also adocument well ahead of its time.The idea did not fly in 1693.In 1945 Europe had finally managed to completelydestroy itself. Two massive wars within the space ofless than 50 years had devastated the continent.European leaders in the early 1950s had a vision whichwas not so different from that of William Penn: to finda way of getting European nations round the table andto sort out their differences in non‐violent ways. Theydecided that economic cooperation was the way to doit. But the driving force at the root of the Europeanproject was the determination never to allow wars todestroy Europe again.The Schuman Declaration of 9 May 1950 made anumber of key points which reinforces this:"World peace cannot be safeguarded without themaking of creative efforts proportionate to thedangers which threaten it.""Europe will not be made all at once, or according to

a single plan. It will be built through concreteachievements which first create a de facto solidarity.""The pooling of coal and steel production... willchange the destinies of those regions which have longbeen devoted to the manufacture of munitions of war,of which they have been the most constant victims."The last of these points: pooling the drivers of war isa game changer is one of the really important lessons.We can see that the project has worked. But at thetime, this was not a foregone conclusion. Of the sixcountries which first made up the Coal and SteelCommunity and the European Economic Community,four had been on one side of WWII and the other twohad been on the other. The willingness to engage withpeople who had been sworn enemies was the first step

in the right direction.Peacemakers throughout Europe, ordinarycitizens in political parties, in churches, intrade unions, who had had more thanenough of war and destruction, were verymuch supporting the move towards thisvision: to prevent war in the future.Today, it is hard to find such enthusiasm for

Europe as a peace project. I have heard it said bysenior decision‐makers: ‘But today, peace is a littlepassé’. Though it is shocking to hear this, I think it isalso correct in so far as the generations for whom thewars of the 20th century in Europe are mere pages in aschool history book do not understand the magnitudeof the change that has been brought about: there hasbeen no active fighting between EU Member States atany time since 1950; we no longer have visarequirements to travel from one country to anotherwithin the EU; we no longer need work permits to workin one another’s countries; now, we travel freelyacross 26 countries in Europe and in 17 countries wecan pay with the same currency. Such change mattersbecause people begin to think of citizens of othercountries as not so different from themselves; aspeople with whom we can imagine solidarity.

Around EuropeQuaker Counc i l fo r European Af fa i r s

No. 345 September 2012

Europe – A Peace Project or a Peace Process?

But the driving forceat the root of the

European project wasthe determination

never to allow wars todestroy Europe again.

But there have been violent conflicts in parts ofthe EU throughout its history: the Basquecountry and Northern Ireland are two examplesof such conflict. There are ongoing conflictsbetween majority and minority populations inmany parts of the EU: the treatment of Roma, ofpeople with a migration background, of gay,lesbian, bisexual and transgendered people inmany of the EU MS all show that there is still thepotential for violent conflict to bubble to thesurface.The EU (and the Council of Europe which hasmade a significant contribution to buildingpeace and understanding and solidarity in Europe) – intheir efforts to combat racism and xenophobia ‐ havedone a lot to keep such conflicts as non‐violent aspossible.But…we need to remind ourselves that there has to besolidarity. So far, progress has been achieved in timesof prosperity. The impact of the financial andeconomic crisis on the response of citizens and someMember State governments to the EU shows howfragile a peace project Europe is. As the EU has grownthrough successive enlargements – in some casesbringing countries into the EU that had a much lowerstandard of living than the old Member States –hostility towards both people from those countriescoming west to seek economic improvement and tothe sharing of EU resources has been evident.The rise of the political right and of the Euro scepticsin many Member States all teach us that the project isfar from finished. Indeed, we should see Europe not somuch as a peace project but as a peace process whichneeds to be worked on over the long term and whichis not only not finished yet but may never becompletely finished. It is about developing andmaintaining a mindset rather than achieving specificoutcomes.Part of the reason why this matters is because of therole the EU plays on the international stage. Article 3of the Treaty on European Union says in its paragraph1: ‘The Union’s aim is to promote peace, its values,and the well‐being of its peoples’.It does not specify where the peace is to be promoted– the implication is that it aims to promote peaceeverywhere in the world. That makes sense because ifthere is violent conflict or war anywhere in the world,it will have implications for the well‐being ofeveryone, including the peoples of Europe.It states – in its Article 2 – what its values are: respect

for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, therule of law and respect for human rights.We have a long way to go in Europe to make the pointthat human rights are indivisible and that justice willonly exist for anyone when it exists for everyone. TheEU has much to do to be consistent in applying respectfor human rights to partners in other countries.The recent review of the European NeighbourhoodPolicy rightly proposes to give ‘more for more’ butdoes not accept that this must also mean ‘less forless’. This is illustrated by the fact that the EU – whilstwringing its hands about the Palestine/Israel conflict –continues to enhance economic relations with theGovernment of Israel in return for that Governmentcompletely ignoring the EU’s stance on human rights,peace and justice.If the EU wants to be seen as a credible actor inpromoting peace, if the EU wants other countries toembrace the EU peace process as a model, then theEU needs to be more credible not only in its historybut in its present. If the EU can step up and becomethat coherent and therefore credible actor for peacethen it will be equal to the vision and the promise ofits founders.Peace activists also have an important role to play.First and foremost, we should remember thatforgetting our history is bound to be an expensivemistake but mere words are not enough. It is vital thatpeace activists reveal the roots of conflict within ourown societies and find ways of addressing them.There are many conflicts within our societies whichhave left deep scars; the miners’ strike of the 1980s inthe UK; the race riots in Rostock in 1992; the attackson public transport networks in Madrid in 2003 andLondon in 2005; all these are examples of the kind ofsituations within Europe which show that we are along way from true solidarity.

2

Roundtable discussion at Quaker House: Photo: J Liebl, EPLO

A quote from another famous Quaker, John Woolman,illustrates the importance of starting on our doorstep:‘May we look upon our treasures, the furniture of ourhouses, and our garments, and try whether the seedsof war have nourishment in these our possessions.’The treasures we may need to look upon (i.e.question) are our unsustainable lifestyles; the factthat we live quite happily with inequality both in thecontext of our own countries and even more so in aglobal context.It therefore seems to me that the European Union andEuropean citizens have to get back to basics – toexamine every one of the EU’s policies – internal andexternal – to see if the roots of conflict lie withinthem or whether such roots of conflict are beingaddressed positively.The European Union has spearheaded a truecommitment to equality and yet there is evidence thatwe are again moving towards greater inequality inEurope. Peace activists need to embrace the call forequality right across society and make sure that

policies at EU and national level are notallowed to increase inequality further.To sum up then, the agenda for the Europe peaceprocess into the future is to:• Recover the history and the historical lessonsthat the peacebuilding project Europe contains• Bring those lessons to the attention of thecoming generations so that we make sure there is noway back from the peacebuilding project Europe• Engage in active solidarity within our townsand cities and our countries and across Europe• Challenge decision‐makers about any policiesand legislation that present the possibility ofincreasing conflict between different groups in thepopulation or the possibility of increasing inequalities• Challenge decision‐makers to be coherent andconsistent in the application of their agreed values totheir relations with other countries.

Martina Weitsch

3

Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe toexamine alternatives to imprisonment

In 2010 QCEA published a detailed report on itsresearch into the use of alternatives to imprisonmentin the member states of the Council of Europe. Wethen spent some time contacting MPs with an interestin criminal justice and who sit in the ParliamentaryAssembly (PACE) of the Council of Europe to encouragethem to take the matter further.

It is therefore gratifyingto see that PACE hasasked its Legal Affairsand Human RightsCommittee to produce areport on this subject.The process started on22 June 2011 with amotion for resolutionsubmitted by Jean‐Charles Gardetto(Monaco/EPP),

supported by a number of other members of theParliamentary Assembly, asking that such a report bewritten, debated and recommendations made.On 13 December 2011 the Legal Affairs and HumanRights Committee appointed Nataša Vučković, a

member of thesocialist group in theAssembly fromSerbia, as theRapporteur.The next stage inthe process is aCommittee hearingwith experts on thesubject due to takeplace in Paris beforethe end of the year.There is no firm datefor the completionof the report or indeed its debate in the Assembly, butit has to be completed before October 2013. QCEA willfollow the matter with interest, hoping that some ofthe key recommendations from our report, especiallythose on restorative justice and circles of support andaccountability, are reflected in the recommendationsproposed by the Rapporteur.

Liz Scurfield

Nataša Vučković, MPphoto: Council of Europe website

Jean‐Charles Gardetto, MPphoto: Council of Europe website

Take out an annual Around Europe Subscription! 22€/£16 for hard copies, 15€/£10 for e‐mailed copies. For information onhow to subscribe to Around Europe or to become a QCEA Associate or Supporting Member please visit our website at:www.qcea.org, phoneus on 0032 2 230 4935 or write to us. We look forward to hearing from you.

4

Around EuropeQuaker Council for European Affairs aisblSquare Ambiorix 50, B‐1000 Brussels, BelgiumEditeur responsable : Elizabeth ScurfieldNo entreprise 0420.346.728www.qcea.orgqceablog.wordpress.com

KEEP UP‐TO‐DATE WITH THE QCEA BLOGTo receive email notifications of all new blogs subscribe on the QCEA blog home page at qceablog.wordpress.com

Members of the European Parliament Approve Major EU‐Israel Trade Agreement

The Additional Protocol to the Euro‐MediterraneanAgreement establishing an EC‐Israel Agreement onConformity Assessment and Acceptance of IndustrialProducts (ACAA) is designed to facilitate the increasedimport of Israeli pharmaceuticals into the EU marketby allowing exporters to certify their products onlyonce for both markets.

The Council of the European Union agreed to thisAdditional Protocol in 2010. It needed EuropeanParliament consent.The Committee for Foreign Affairs voiced concernsabout the lack of control the EU would have inensuring that this agreement would not be abused inorder to bring pharmaceutical products into the EUfrom illegal Israeli settlements in the OccupiedPalestinian Territories. Despite the concerns, theCommittee gave its opinion in June and recommendedthat consent be given provided that certain safeguardswere in place which had been asked for from theCommissioner for Trade.On 18 September 2012, the International TradeCommittee in the European Parliament voted in favourof consenting to the Protocol by a narrow margin andagainst the recommendation of the Chair of theCommittee. There will be a vote in the plenary, whichwe will try to influence. For now, economicexpediency has won again over human rights andjustice.

Liz ScurfieldEuropean Parliament: photo QCEA