 And here we have a wonderful panel, I think, to describe for us Europe's issues. I'm Stephen Erlinger. I'm with the New York Times. I've been lots of places, now in Brussels, as the European diplomatic correspondent. One of the most interesting things I think about today is Poland is voting. I mean, that's one of these things that actually matters. And Hungary is preparing to vote. Another one of those things that actually matters, because it goes right to the heart of whether Europe holds itself together on issues of principle and rule of law, whether Europe decides to reformulate its idea of what it is to have integration. And then we have all these other issues which you all know, I think. We have disputes over immigration. We have issues over Islamophobia. We have questioning from the Gilles Jean to the AFD to Brexit, which is a live issue that remains, and which I don't think the European Union has yet absorbed all of the consequences. But it's already creating new coalitions inside the European Union, and it's creating a kind of anxiety about the power of France, especially with Germany seeming so paralyzed now by its political impasse and by a coalition that, as they used to say about empires, long ago disappeared but never went away. So what I thought I would do with your indulgence is because we have so many wonderful panelists and so little time. I've told our panelists not to stand up and give speeches for 10 minutes in a row, because that's no good for them and no good for you. I'm going to ask a few leading questions. I'm going to try to have a conversation, and then I actually want to go to you, because this is an interest clearly to everyone fairly early in our discussion. So we have roughly 80 minutes. So the first thing I want to do is just ask the panelists when they think about the problems of the European Union today, what are the one or two issues? Only one or two issues. I don't want them to talk for more than two or three minutes. That seemed most prominent to them, and I thought I would start at the other end with the former French Foreigner, Mr. Ubert Vendrina. Mr. Vendrina, please. Thank you, dear friend. First of all, I will speak in French. So this language is authorized, of course. Yes, exactly. So on the other hand, I apologize in advance. I have to leave for the reasons behind the plane at 45. So I will not be there until the end of the table. I apologize. So very quickly, as you asked us, we are supposed to be talking about European uncertainties. In fact, between European uncertainties. I think we must immediately distinguish conjonctural uncertainties, structural uncertainties, perhaps even deep, vital, and then ask ourselves what to do. I will not develop all that. It is just a list of topics. Conjonctural uncertainties are huge. They are self-evident. How will the new Commission be composed? Who will France propose to Mrs. Goulart, who should have never been proposed, but this other thing? How will it work? How will we establish the relationship of force between the Parliament, which imposes its supremacy, and the rest? And what will this Europe do to Trump, if he is elected, or one another? And what will this Europe do in relation to Putin, in relation to the Chinese, in relation to the chaos of the Middle East, in relation to the migratory issue, etc. So there are many questions. What will Europe do in relation to technological destructions? These are all conjonctural uncertainties that jump into the figures as soon as you open a newspaper and look at an issue. I think that there are behind that more profound, structural uncertainties, or existential uncertainties. The first thing is, are the Europeans going to resort or not to build a kind of European power, that some have been asking for a long time, because they are afraid of many Europeans, even in the current context. Secondly, will Europe, which we are talking about, be able to respond to the destructions of popular classes and middle classes in relation to the idea of globalization, in relation to the idea of Europe? It is not obvious. Thirdly, will Europe be able to protect itself from the global crisis of representative democracy, since we are in a world where people should no longer be represented? In the democratic world, they say to someone on Sunday and three days later, they are furious. It becomes almost impossible to manage modern democracies not only in Europe. Will Europe be able to find a response to this? Will it be able to find, in co-management with the countries of departure and transit, an intelligent negotiation to manage migratory phenomena that will always be there? It is less conjunctural, it is permanent. So I think there are two levels. I suggest that when we are going to ask ourselves that you are going to ask yourself what can we do with these questions to which we could add the ecological context which concerns the whole good. It is not a special European challenge. So I think we have to try to distinguish in the treatment of conjunctural immediate with the answers that bring us to immediate activity and the background treatments which are supposed to find a credibility, a legitimacy of democratic systems and I finish here what we should be very brief at the beginning. I think it is very good to do the role of multilateralism. It is very good to do the role of liberalism, democracy in the condition that it works. It is not a question of not to work. It is not a question of religion. So the challenge is huge which is launched to all those who are in democracy, especially in Europe which has given many lessons to this subject. It is to make sure that it works. We show to the people that you have to adhere to this system even if it modifies a lot. You have to concentrate on challenges in my opinion and uncertainty. Thank you Mr. Thank you for sort of laying out these questions and making this important distinction between the pressing issues and the ones that are structural because I hope we will have time to really get to both. I think we will just go down the line from you to Falker Pertas who is the head of I am not sure how to translate it but it is the SVP in Berlin which is one of Germany's best think tanks and Falker has been particularly has lots of expertise but has been very involved with Syria questions too. So one of the things that you might want to talk about is a bit of European foreign policy and defense so Falker over to you. Well thank you Steve SVP you better don't translate it's Stiftung Wissenschaft and Politik which is a hard test for everybody who doesn't speak German so we call it the German Institute for International and Security Affairs which is easier I think. Minister Wiedrin has already sort of laid out the whole layer of uncertainties and I think it would be fair to say and you asked us what concerns us most to say what probably of all these uncertainties concerns me not as much as other things ten years ago we would have said the financial crisis and the economic situation of Europe it's no longer our main concern at some point in these last ten years we would have said European institutions I don't think it is our main concern. 2016 I thought that Brexit would become our major concern it would occupy us for many many years and sort of divide Europe that hasn't happened even the migration crisis is well under control for the time being and I guess we are a bit better braced today than we were in 2015 2016 so there are a lot of things that don't concern me as much even though they are part of these uncertainties. What concerns me much most I think is in an order of priority just to mention too sort of the combination of developments in our strategic environment our most important ally no longer being our most reliable ally unrest in our immediate neighborhood which Europe has proven unable to deal with in a convincing manner a big neighbor who has told us again that military power counts even in Europe which we thought it didn't so much and a rising power in China which is not a benign partner but still has to be a partner because we don't want to decouple as probably some Americans think they should do and the combination of these changes in our strategic environment with a rise of illiberal movements in our own countries the two things of course aren't separable they hang together not directly but indirectly and I think we already see in some countries that where more illiberal movements get to govern their countries they are also much closer in their outlook to some of our adversaries outside Europe so that is concerning for me I think we can go deeper into what Europe should do in this field but I leave it at that That's also quite a good start because sometimes I think at the base of all this is really a Europe that isn't growing fast enough to provide the money required to keep wonderful social programs going which creates a whole class of people who feel that their lives have been worsened by modernity and that goes to the heart I think of quite a lot of these issues Ana I don't even want to introduce you you've been everything so Ana Palacio over to you I had an idea to say a few things that I'm not going to say because I think that thank you Hubert you have really presented what there is there for us so I will make three comments the first comment I will go take the lens back from the citizen in my opinion what is more puzzling with our citizens which has a repercussion in our system in our political system there is this growth of the illiberals is that Europe is the place of rationality rationality comes from the enlightenment and we are supposed to make choices based on the interest what we see today is the invasion everywhere of the irrationality of the emotional and this we have to analyze and all our instruments are geared because in the end we are legal construction all our system is a legal construction and legality is about predictability and it's about certainty and the answer to predictability and certainty is emotions and so this is for me one issue in which we have to reflect and reflect deeply if I take the lens a bit further I think that we have and I won't go into it in our governance because we still are states even if some of us would like to be somewhere else we are states in our states we have this challenge on how to transform classical party system that had classical agenda and that comes from the first challenge but of course when we go to the European level I agree with the Bevedrin we should this is in our interest create in Europe this is absolutely clear but honestly we have to realize that our citizens do not follow on this idea of building more Europe and you know what we are in an intergovernmental moment in the European Union the crisis in the in the commission is many things first of them is the reflect of this intergovernmental moment when groups the PEP the group the PSC group the classical groups that made it forward that by agreeing by having a big discipline are completely splintered my third comment taking the lens is honestly this is not any longer our world and it's difficult to adapt it I mean it's not a European it's not a western world and you know we say this but we don't we haven't interiorize this so we have either the panic reaction or the overreaction or but I mean Kevin I mean I think that we have to have clear eyes of what's coming and what's coming is exactly what you have said so our dependence on the United States our transatlantic links all this we have to rationally and I will just end by this comment which is a bit contradictory what I rationally address thank you very much I often think the other great phrase is but I always think protege from what exactly I mean who I understand but what's from what is confusing so that leads me in a not very nice segue possibly to Artem Malgin who is a director at one of Russia's great universities trusty your four is yours okay good afternoon thank you and since Russia's European identity is kind of ambivalent or split identity I can give you two lists of European uncertainties what I consider one is how we see your European if we mean Europe by EU and how we see European if we mean a slightly wider Europe so it's Brexit you care so much about it but I guess it's returned to kind of traditional already existed in history trilateral structure of the Euro-Atlantic West and nothing new strategic happens in this case migration of law it's still uncertainty but I guess you already got used to this inflow and thanks God it stopped and it could resume because of what's happening in Kurdistan in Syria with a new offensive of Turkey then it right wing parties right wing politicians and even traditionalists if women for example those who are still in power I don't know whether you're going to keep their chances really very strong they're traditionalists but those traditionalists those who nowadays Europe a kind of really old-fashioned and those who make various upon say greater dynamism of Europe for the development of the European Union and sure here from Russia to to different attitudes once it's to follow you let's say kind of general public attitude that it's it's a kind of challenge it's something huge outstanding it's all that stuff and another some of the Russians that they consider that they can play worse this right wingers and traditions that are not always traditionalists ready to interact with the Russians once again this Polish case Balkans sure they're not any more as white as they were previously such a immense field of problems but this bunch of Soviet, Kosovo and Macedonia it's still there it's still an uncertainty then it's U.S. foreign policy towards Europe that makes U.S. more distant from Europe that somehow poses difficulties inside Europe it brings additional problems when it comes to overall organization of world trade and makes all the agreements of EU with its neighbors traditional partners including African or ACP partners more complicated since U.S. behaves in the world trade system in absolute the non-WTO let us say way and then another list a list of let us say greater Europe problems first of all it's Ukraine then it's Turkey because Turkey provokes European problems outside Europe but then they come to Europe with again with Middle East again with new sometimes very surprising unions alliances when it comes to the situation in the Middle East it involves the Europeans and Russia itself Do you mind if I just come back I just curious why do you think Russia is so attractive European right wingers how do you explain that I guess it's simply very official and wrong attitude because they simply say something that different from what those who are traditionalist I mean traditionalist Western Europeans say say they say different things that the governments it's old-fashioned game that dates to the between war periods to find out different awkward groupings and to deal with them having in mind their potential access to power but I guess both this attitude is wrong and next that those awkward groupings in spite the fact that they tend to be very numerous that they come at once in some periods to the European saying that they not that say kind of overwhelming friend in Europe Thank you Michael Lothian Lord Lothian we have a Brexit problem but why don't you talk a bit about what that means for the EU and whether you think maybe Boris Johnson whose words are always taken with a big pound of salt can sort of pull this off I was rather pleased and surprised we got this far around the circle without anybody having mentioned Brexit that wouldn't have been the case last year I think it's become that's right as someone once said we were afraid it was an infection now we realize it's a vaccine I think one of the problems why we don't talk about Brexit so much now is none of us know where we've got to it's one of those great examples of three years of people highly intelligent people negotiating with each other day after day and at the end of the three years coming in saying we've got no solution possibly over the next few days we'll find that Boris in a flurry of words will have found a solution but not one that I can see readily on the way the other interesting thing is I don't have much difference with my colleagues here they say other differences within Europe I think we're all mainly agreed on that I think one of the elements that I would like to sort of highlight is when we say why are there these differences why do they lead to populism one of the reasons is on one side there are what a lot of people feel are the elites the intelligentsia who we have heard today from Anna I think it was in the end Europe through its intelligentsia I must tell the people of Europe what they think they need if you said to me what was it that caused Brexit in the first place I would say largely that there was a feeling in Britain and perhaps more widely that we weren't being listened to when I say we I'm not saying the politicians politicians were always playing and listening to ordinary people and they eventually showed it in a vote and we've seen this in other countries where there haven't been votes I wonder what the result had been had there been some of the votes that they show it by getting on the street or by protesting or by raising matters in parliament in a very unhelpful way we've seen our parliament almost brought to its knees by parliamentarians the so-called intelligentsia and I think we do have to go back fairly soon to saying to people what is it that you look for from a European elite do you want to have some system whereby you can regularly be asked what do you think what you want us to do about it and we begin to answer that and it's the answering of that that I think is the most important thing at the moment more than Brexit I think there are two areas where already we could be working to establish a common ground but outside Europe one is intelligence because there is so much sharing of intelligence at the moment which is not bound to the European Union it's done on a voluntary basis and we cannot see that in danger because that would be very dangerous for the Western world as a whole I think we should be working out structures within which we can properly share intelligence and if necessary not sharing when we can't second thing which has come up before the European army I don't see it as that I think there is a very big void now in Europe for a military force and I don't see it being a European one for the reason that there are certain countries who would not want to join it there are other countries who might well say the first time we have to take a decision as to what they should do we don't want to do it so we ought to now look at how we can begin to build a military force and a military establishment that brings in those countries who really offer something positive those countries by and large and we know it within our hearts are Britain Germany and France and probably in a certain sense Poland as well we should be looking now how we begin to form a structure within which they can operate as a group not in Europe, not necessarily in NATO but as a group which has a European common strand great thank you very very much and Enrico Leta now in Paris as Dean of the School of International Relations at Siles Po who can I hope get up above nationalism and tell us really what is straining Europe in your view and what matters most what needs to be fixed most I think it was very good to have this session to read immediately after Kevin's session on China because I guess at the end of the day our takes on Europe as puissance as you said can only be shaped in the discussion about the relationship with China and the US so in the new word in which G2 is taking place there's a new topic for Europe and the new topic is being together the alternative, the other option is having just the choice in ten years time to be singularly an American colony or a Chinese colony that is the big topic and there's no other discussion on that and I think it's the main point today with 28 Brexit the choice would be only for each of our countries to be an American colony or a Chinese colony and I think Brexit was the idea of the UK to be in next century to be the 51st American state or something like that I think Europe can be a third superpower only being united and only being united and taking leadership on two main subjects and two main subjects are subject for the future climate change we had a terrific panel this morning on that and the second one is technological human if I may say in the word able to take leadership on how to have good regulation how to protect persons right it was very good this morning we had this point about ownership of data corporations in the US state in China and person in Europe and at the end of the day that is the true difference and that allows us to think to have a leadership on that so I think we have to develop this point and we have to take this leadership so these two are for me the main subject for the future and I think Ursula von der Leyen had a good choice having some competences for the vice president having this two subjects at the very top of the list with Festagger and Timmermans on these two topics there's a but on all this discussion that is the fact that everything can be completely overwhelmed by this present Turkish situation I say that because I I remember has the how the the previous migration crisis raised and it was with the Syrian crisis we underestimated consequences of the mismanagement of the Syrian crisis and we had one million of people and we had completely disaster politically I think with all the consequences we know I think partially Brexit was also because of the images of jungle of Calais the colony the Italian situation because of that and then in Germany and Vox in Spain and the rest so my final point Stephen is I'm really worried about what is happening because there are two topics one is Erdogan's threats but there's the second one his threats to open the door the second one is that if the war will continue we will have Kurdish immigrants and that will be for us Europeans without enough new rules because we during the crisis we had two financial crisis and migration crisis for financial crisis we fixed the roof partially but we fixed we created the ESM we had many new tools for migration crisis the situation today is as it was five years ago, six years ago we don't have tools so my final point is that I hope we will be able to face this threat this threat can be a disaster for Europe in the next two months and I think on this migration crisis we need to have new emergency tools and not to look at business as usual tools because they don't work it would be nice to have a common asylum policy to begin with but never mind let's try to deal with the China question since it was the question at lunch it seems to be on quite a lot of people's minds Missiva Dreen, do you think that Enrico kind of laid it out in fairly stark terms do you think Europe really does have to choose somehow between the US and China or is this a false choice do you think in the ideal Europe shouldn't have to choose Europe should have its position and according to the subjects it would agree or not with the United States, agree or not with China it would even play a constructive role on the new rules of globalization we need to focus a little more but it's supposed that Europe has its own position so if it doesn't have its own position it will indeed be condemned to choose or to submit in terms of technology so it's very important that Europeans manage to define a common vision it's supposed to have the same evaluation which is not obvious whether it's an opportunity whether it's just a partnership bigger than the others already there is no agreement on the evaluation and the diagnosis if we came to that if we had some common positions and some priorities as Europeans it's obvious that almost of the day in the afternoon we would find on this particular point a real power that we would have to use because when we talk about power a theme that is finally developed it's about reasonable power of course, rational and so on so it starts with an effort between Europeans on the exact evaluation which is not yet done exactly would others like to come in on this question Anna then I in the ten points highlighted by Kevin lunchtime from Xi Jinping perspective the tenth is our priority as Westerners and in particular as Europeans and I would say as Europeans because our strength and we are back we are not any longer on this idea of the soft power and the 21st century being the era or the beginning of the era of law but we are wired in legal terms we are wired in institutional terms which means that I absolutely agree with Kevin the position of China is to infuse new values to the existing framework not to shake it as we have tried to do sometimes but in the end sharing the core the core issues bringing into a legal western approach rational context concepts like harmony we have to understand this and to just be very clear about what this means it's not just a nice word and taking just one example I think that for us this idea of power it was very interesting this idea that this privacy or ownership of data we bet on the citizens we have millions of billions of allies that are concerned that we need to be to be meant to get the consequences of what we mean and stand by them and just on this issue of China counter the subtle idea because when they establish other institutions okay you see that but when they come and they infuse different concepts values principles in the existing institutions that perceive focus if we were to accept this binary choice if we were to accept that we have to choose the one side or the other we would already have lost we would have lost our whatever aspiration of some form any form of strategic autonomy or european sovereignty or whatever you call it and therefore I think we simply must not accept it and lay out and I think we have good reasons and good arguments and good instruments to lay out that there are alternatives of course China is a competitor but the question is how do you compete I mean do you simply geopolitize and militarize competition or do we say it is competition over a whole range of policy issues which includes that you cooperate on some issues where you have a common interest climate change for example but you compete over technology and you compete over social models and I think the European Commission got it right in that strategic paper which it issued earlier that year and which probably doesn't have a 100% consensus in Europe but a very very wide ranging consensus where they actually split sort of the policy fields and said yes China is an economic partner China is a partner on some global affairs like working on climate change it is a logical competitor no doubts about it and what probably didn't go down too well in Beijing China is a systemic rival when it comes to issues of governance I think saying that clearly and making sure that being a systemic rival would not keep us from cooperating on climate change I mean why should we sort of give up cooperate on issues of mankind because we have a competition about that is the way Europe has to go if it wants to assert itself and my last point we are not alone here I mean go to Southeast Asia go to India go to Latin America and I guess there are a lot of actors there I mean it's young people who would like to have Huawei and Apple or Apple with Chinese characteristics it's also a lot of elites who would like to have American arms with Chinese finance Chinese financing if that was possible I mean no one wants to choose so why should we be pushed into that binary choice just by the US because I mean sometimes what worries me is I mean long time ago I wrote a piece called Needing an Enemy and Finding China and I think there's this great risk of creating something that doesn't have to be there and if you're thinking about climate change I mean China is now responsible for 40% of CO2 I mean people in Europe could heat their coffee by blowing on it and it would make almost no difference to the fate of the planet so dealing with China on these things India matters terribly Enrico sorry please Just one point about the fact that this binary choice in my thought is the consequence of 28 Brexit interesting of 28 Brexit each country has only a binary choice to be a colony of the US or a colony of China being together we can avoid the choice because we can be at the same level on many issues we can take the leadership of some of these issues and we have to change our narrative on Europe on that because our narrative is still on some issues the same narrative of the 60s and the 70s the cold war narrative about peace, stability and so on that is no more I think the narrative with which you can deal with young people and the new generation we have to clearly tell them there are issues where we can take the leadership only if we are united if not it's impossible to take this leadership and at the end of the day the choice for all the different member states will be to be closer to the one or to other one this is why at the end of the day I think our choice is a very political choice and it's a political choice in terms also of delivery because if we are not able to deliver on some of these issues it's quite impossible and for instance on many of these issues delivery means also the way in which we decided to take decisions for instance I am in that period I know it's very difficult to say I know it's very divisive but we can't continue thinking that we have on all the different issues to be at 28 or at 27 I am a big fan of considering that Two Speeds Europe was a success on many issues Euro and Schengen two successes to Two Speeds Europe so it is not a blasphemy to say Two Speeds Europe on some subject but we have to be very very concrete effective and saying that we need delivery if we continue to be two orthodox saying that we can't have Two Speeds Europe because it is heterodox today citizens will not be happy of the decisions and they will decide to vote for Le Pen or for Salvini or whatever so it's a problem of delivery of how to be effective in our decisions in some way some decisions we have to take these decisions out of the treaties I am very I know it's a sort of blasphemy but ESM was a decision taken outside the treaties because it was in one night to take the decisions and the European Union needs to give the citizens the idea that we can protect them because we are able to decide and not just to wait because of treaties difficulties, unanimous decisions and so on and so forth Well, blasphemy is good here I think I actually want to ask Artemis a question if I may and then Michael I'll come to you Russia's kind of knew what we call this what Kevin called the strategic condominium with China is this tactical or strategic I mean is it out of current sense of weakness or is it some I talked to Alexander Dugan the other day believe it or not sort of slightly mad theorist of Eurasia and I can't tell how seriously anyone exists in Russia so do you think maybe Russia bends too far toward China and is it tactical or is it a long term partnership do you think look I guess in this kind of condominium only you the Europeans you believe in this condominium we don't since we are much closer to China and even us we believe in China to be good predictors to have really adequate forecasts if you look you and us the Russians we overlooked all dramatic changes through the post second world war history of China it shows how we understands and this perfect report this perfect sketch of what God shows to what extent of understanding of China we are not upon any other country we can imagine such as speech brilliant speech at a lounge general they grand lines of the French foreign policy or German or Austrian or even Russian it shows that our understanding of China is still tremendous, less official we talk about binary choice but whether Chinese do choose in the same way they have India they have Southeast Asia they have many times more developed relations with United States they have the African policy they have been overlooked by everyone by the Europeans by the Americans and I guess our point of view upon the China here from Europe or from Moscow I guess for the Chinese it's still the same Europe it's inadequate and I guess here about condominium where it's condominium in Central Asia in the Caucasus over Mongolia I see no space for this condominium relations with China to my mind they're going to be much more complex not European or Euro-Atlantic style it's one point and another we still have to understand what is driving force for the Chinese economic growth and when and because of what it can stop potentially and since we overlooked so many changes in Chinese developments I guess probably we also overlooked the margins the Paris the constraints of this economic growth and if there are some of these constraints it ruins the whole picture this very frightening picture of nowadays China's relations with the rest of the world Thank you Michael I think you've said it twice now what do you call the binary choice of the decision on Brexit between China on the one hand and America on the other because if you came to London or anywhere in the United Kingdom and you said that was your view of what Brexit was about they'd look at you in total confusion because if that was the question the British would vote for neither the whole point about Brexit was to give ourselves more room for manoeuvring without being tied at a major block so I think if you say that this is the question that Europe has got to take into account I would say to you that is not a valid question we genuinely somebody said to me why have you always appeared to be anti-European my answer has always been we're not anti-European we're part of Europe we've always been part of Europe our history is European we are anti overdone bureaucracy and if you want to see in the world the best example I can think of overdone bureaucracy you find it in Brussels and the feeling in Britain was that to be told you could do certain things you could eat certain things you could dress in a certain way was a decision for Europe was something that got under their skin when you say why did they vote the way they did in a sense they were blaming the British politicians for not talking to them it's only now after the referendum is over we're discovering had we gone down and talked to them about these things earlier Precisely Henry do you want to answer quickly? No just to say that my point is not that this is the discussion about the referendum my point is that will be the consequence in 10 years time in 10 years time with separation with split of Europe each country in 10 years time not today will have only to decide whether to be an American colony or a Chinese colony with the split of the European Union that is my point maybe I'm wrong I can't see with the evolution demographic in terms of economic power the possibility of any of the European country to be able to deal alone with China or with the US the only possibility to stand all together and this is why I think for the UK it would be a problem not today I'm sure and I know very well the debate was on other issues I No that's fine I mean this is all understood Michael Honestly you have explained the divide between the elite and the people I mean what you are saying on the Brussels being the big bureaucratic it's what the elite in your country has been this has been the anthem of your elite so I think that you as elite you should revise what you have been telling and what this idea of not having the right I mean being forbidden to have coffee or tea bags not coffee I mean mind you not coffee tea bags or this kind of thing hey this is not a reality we are not going to discuss bureaucracy in Brussels and its successes but I think that there you have hey honestly you as elites you have to look at yourself it's not that we do not have to do it in other countries but frankly on the Brexit issue I have to say that Okay Well done let's actually not keep going too much on Brexit because we are in a kind of interesting moment where things might get resolved nicely I suspect my own guess is there will be a technical extension and for not very long because one of the things quite clear to me is Boris Johnson would like it done before he has an election which he also needs but you know everybody has got their own views and Minister of Adrene makes his apologies he had he couldn't avoid and we got started a bit late so I just wanted to express to you from him his deep regrets for having to leave early so we still have about half an hour I'd like to, given Poland I'd love to talk a little bit about Hungary, Poland, rule of law this is one of the great perhaps it's tied to the migration issue it's tied to the identity issue it's tied to lots of things but can Europe at 28, 27 can Europe deal with this question what are the instruments can it do better or is it better to somehow rethink the idea of what European federalism is to allow for more sovereignty which might have kept Britain in the European Union had it been done earlier so would anyone like to deal with this question so Michael why don't you I cut you off before I can only speak for myself but I voted to leave because after 40 years of being told that Europe was going to reform I got fed up with waiting for it but had somebody come along with a proper reform proposed which would have given less power to Brussels and more power to the individual nations and their peoples I would probably have supported that the goal used to speak of the Europe the nation I was a fervent European in those days I am a fan of Jacques Delors Brent Fédération Détanation because I think it was a good synthesis my point and I continue on the blasphemy mood my point is that there are many migrations and in the relationship with Visigrad countries frankly speaking we can't think we will have any positive and concrete effective solution having Orban at the table with the veto right this is my point if someone is convincing on this point I would be more than happy but I think it's very complicated with these topics we need to have another treaty a treaty outside of EU treaties signed by willing countries without Hungary or without Poland I don't know the other Visigrad countries position but with the idea to have a treaty with tools with relocation with the framework with meanings and with rules and with the majority rule to decide until now we had evolutions on this topic and at the end of the day they are ineffective they are not working so my point is that if we continue allowing those countries to stop the decisions of the others it will be a problem for us and it will be an European Union so it is just one example just to tell you that at the end of the day I think it's the only way to be very assertive and to be also clear with them I know that there's a big difference between the funding members of the European Union and Visigrad countries in terms of demographics funding members of the European Union we used to be around 10% of our population is an immigrant origin around 10% less more but it is around 10% if I'm not wrong in Poland, Hungary these figures are 99 versus 1% and the 1% is not coming from Africa or from Latin America it's coming from the rest of Central Europe so at the end of the day there's a very big point of starting that is so different this is why I say we can't wait we have to have new tools so this new treaty for me is one of the urgencies of this new political legislation it is worth saying that Poland has many more immigrants than you imagine but most of them are Ukrainian so Anna and then Volker I agree with Enrico and I think that the only way forward is a geography variable so distinct groupings in distinct issues the problem we have here is not migration I think that what you were referring is more the principles and values that are enshrined in Article 2 of the treaty and in particular let me say independence of the justice of the judiciary system independence of justice this is something that we have to rethink and maybe you know what diminish the area where we have judicial cooperation this is something that we will have to address with open eyes I think that the days have changed and you know what it could be done we could go shrinking and it should not be perceived and I think that we can explain it to our population so absolutely clear in new areas we can address the 28 and Schengen and the Euro are good examples of things that Schengen is clear it was thought outside and then it was incorporated and this incorporation probably should be revisited and we have to do it we have to do it this is my perspective because the rule of law is also changing because the law is changing we have to defend it in this context of China of just weakening of the value of the law of other instruments international treaties Paris is not legally binding this is a new system and we need to understand that in cooperation and I'm a died in the world lawyer European continental lawyer but you know we have to be realistic and in terms of European Union let's rethink certain sensitive areas ok Poland you don't want ok then you are not in the Schengen area you are not in the cooperation in the judicial cooperation and we negotiate and we decide the alternative do these reforms to have an independent justice lawyer please one I think on Europe being so unreformable that's a little bit of a myth which probably helped to win the Brexit referendum in Britain but I think the British Prime Minister at that time David Cameron was the one who proved that you can renegotiate a couple of important issues like the question of social benefits to immigrants and their children who live in other countries and he got the consensus from the others so things could be changed and that is what happens I mean it's a living body and the European Union is always a work in progress and things do change and the bureaucracy in Brussels is not much bigger than that of a big city in Europe actually I remember a Canadian friend once coming and saying well we are so envious that you are having something like Brussels because it means that your nation states trade bureaucracy 27 or 28 times so I guess you will have a little bit more bureaucracy in Britain after Brexit because you need your own trade negotiators now rather than sourcing that out to Brussels who is doing it in the common European interest but more importantly I think on the other issues either we actually have as the letter says either we have a sort of flexible geography or we have qualified majority voting including foreign policy and I think both would be a way to overcome this embarrassing situation that in the UN or in the Human Rights Council we have a statement read by one European council for 27 out of 28 the UK is always with the majority here and then of Hungary or Greece saying we cannot share that because it is against China also so why not have qualitative majority voting also on foreign policy issues I think that would be the way forward and sort of the dialectic conclusion of that is I mean we complain so much about people saying that elites don't listen to them but here we have something if we would go forward with a stronger foreign policy where the majority of the people in Europe and we know that from opinion polls all over the place would be with us so one thing where people want more integration is foreign policy and security policy they don't want it in cultural policies they don't want it in social policies necessarily but foreign policy security they do all want more integrated Europe I would like I've got one more question and I'd like to go then to the audience so please think of some questions you might have for our panel Artyom did you just comment a little bit upon Poland I guess I'll tell you just a friend of mine from Italy once it was before 2004 he said look it was a talk between two Italians look the polls going to join EU and another one he commented yeah the polls are such Russians who write in Latin alphabet and you should understand the difference between these parts of Europe they they don't feel responsibility for the migrants that are not theirs they don't feel responsibility for these regions they never had in common with the Middle East or Africa it's as simple as that do believe me I can tell this because my children they're 50% Polish inside the countries in the west in absolutely Russian meaning in your part of Europe most of you from the western part of Europe that is why they need much more time to get used to this solidarity probably Germany has not so much in common with Italy as France Britain but you already got used to this kind of sovereignty to this kind of solidarity and joint common responsibility the polls they didn't use but at the same time they consider as ours them those who come from even from the Caucasus from Central Asia since it's not something alien they simply have their family histories family memory that ok we had a Polish origin governor in Georgia by the way he's a great grandson he's a professor of our university professor Baranowski so it's another history and you could not force them I'm not searching special it's good I mean and also let me just add one sentence I mean one forgets and you don't mind if I say this under Soviet Union they were under a Beljar for 70 years there was no immigration and emigration under the Soviet Union from Poland I mean maybe you could emigrate a bitch but there was no immigration much so it's all a bit of a shock I think and it does feed people who want to play on fears of identity and what's happening to the family and all the rest of it I think given time we've got about 17 minutes I I'm just going to go to you I see Elizabeth Gigu please and then Jean-Louis and then Stuart so let's take three at least Thank you very much I share the point of view of the recovery stage I I really think that the only way to overcome the internal divisions between the European Union is to look at the world around us there's China and the United States I don't it's certainly as Volcker says to help us take decisions the majority vote obviously the best solution but my question to Enrico and Volcker is to say how do we have allies within Europe of the European Union and allies outside to do what we want allies inside we have to find ways to unite with our vision Central and Eastern Europe who have another story and and by the way when the essential is in play we saw it with Brexit and allies outside to the United States and China what do we have to do with Africa we have so many common challenges to take up it seems to me blind immigration security, climate youth employment and complementarity how do you allow how do you check that the problem is how do we do Mr. Krager I would say on this discussion a motion of synthesis in a radical congress I agree the two priorities indicated by Enrico and with the absolutely vital necessity to have a policy of security because Volcker to quote another responsible German as Védrine often says it's the famous phrase of Sigmar Gabriel Europe is a little bit a continent an union of vegetarians in a carnivore world so we still have to be a little more muscular my question is does it seem to me that we haven't talked and I think it's a lack of our debate not we haven't talked about Russia I'm not talking about you Arthèb, but I'm talking about the other participants but Russia is extremely important the idea that because its PNB is not that of China the relationship of power the economy it's the military there are deep, historical, cultural that we have with Russia and so let's say as we say the impasse on Russia it's extremely dangerous we have an opportunity and I think that President Macron he seized it, he proclaimed it there is an opportunity with the Ukrainian political evolution with the general context to get out this pin of the foot on the Ukraine and don't you think there is this opportunity don't you think that without this illusion of separating Russia from China which is absurd at least in human life it's not reasonable but instead of finding flexibility in the game with a separate relationship dialectical from Europe with China as with Russia obviously with the United States Russia is playing a game Russia over Crimea whether it is getting a rand of the bargaining table which led to the JCPOA if we had done this with China where we have mutual interest we wouldn't have the standoff we did now there is in my opinion a bipartisan majority and Congress and certainly in the public for reviving a partnership that the President has said the European Union was created as an enemy of the US is there enough patience in Europe to recognize that whether it's in two more years or six more years that there is a body of opinion in the United States that wants to restore this partnership for the great issues or will you feel that you have to go your own way and decouple to use Kevin Rudd's opinion from the United States and in fact we have the greatest trade relationship as well in the world okay thanks let's get Mr. Mauritinos former Spanish Foreign Minister thank you because I have to prepare myself for the next session very shortly I fully agree with Hubert and Rico we need European prisons there is no other alternative number one the rest is chaos and we don't like chaos number two how we create these new European prisons with the founding fathers today elites can meet in Brussels but maybe they will not be able to go to the Salon de la Rose to sign the declaration of money and Shuman so we need maybe the founder Sons the generation of Erasmus they are the one who has been beneficial of what Europe have done number three I agree with Rico we need to create a new narrative and that's my question what you are going to put in this narrative climate change I will prefer the EDG it's larger not only we all become ecologists but there is more than ecology in life we need to have economy and we have other foreign policy as Volker said security what are for you and finally all the 27 have to be there no we should create a new a different criteria in order to join this new narrative and the one who fulfilled them they are part of the club if not to belong to another group of friends another bit of blasphemy let's go back but try to be brief because I'd like to take one more round of questions so would anyone like to deal with let's say the Russia question or Russia Ukraine Macron's I don't know whether it's whether it's actually a rapprochement or I put together the two questions in French I react in French I believe that the question that Elizabeth asked on the alliance is the crucial question I think there was a mistake in Europe at the time of the enlargement and after we made a speech a bit in a neo-colonial way imagining that they entered I speak of European Central and Oriental and by entering they became like us on all aspects I think it was a colossal mistake because we had to keep in mind differences that come from 50 years of history so what I think is very important today is to make a speech with them a bit like we did with Toucher when we started the role I ask Jean-Claude on the left side with Toucher we did a speech you don't enter but you give us the possibility to advance I don't know if the speech was done in a completely stopped way but it was like that I think that on some subjects it must be done like that and they can become potential allies of this dynamic I totally agree with you on Africa it is one of the subjects of this conference I think that we have a decade of incredible mistakes as Europeans I hope that I am very, very optimistic because I know Joseph Borel Joseph Borel is someone who has Africa in his heart he knows, he knows what it is he will do a wonderful job on this subject the question of Mr. Jurgorin which I find absolutely essential I am optimist by nature I am among those who see a small step forward what happened a few days ago I consider it a step forward but since the Minsk agreement was made because Europe played a role I think that Europe still has to play a role if we are completely in retreat I don't want to play the role I think that the situation will remain without any possibility of reaction my final point about there I am very pessimistic and I have to say just very clearly that next November 2020 elections will be decided for Europe and for the transatlantic relationship I can't imagine other four years of Trump leaving the European Union and the US thinking that we have a rendezvous in 2024 I think it will be complicated and a new China-Europe deal will be the consequence of a new Trump reelection this is why I think it's so crucial to have a different result next November I just to say in Europe I think that there is still a critical mass that would abide by this idea of the indispensable nation we believe that the United States is for us for this international institutional system for the rule of law system the United States is the crucial the architect all this but honestly I would add another pessimism to the pessimism that Enrico utter is that I think that the United States has changed that we may have a bipartisan bipartisan agreement in the Hill but that the United States and this is why Trump got elected is not any longer there and that last note of just concern from the European voice is that this change started before Trump was elected the change in the engagement this idea that was said of engagement and shaping and just hedging I think has changed the foreign policy of Obama was already a precursor of what we are seeing in foreign policy I mean it would be better in terms of formal terms if you allow me just well behave present that doesn't insult the European allies but you know being an ally of yours has never been easy started to be extremely extremely difficult under the Obama administration frankly to date it's impossible and unless this change it's always been fun it's always been fun depending on where you were sitting well I guess for many of us it was more difficult under the George W. Bush presidency than under the Obama presidency because the Iraq war not only was a major transatlantic issue it also was an issue that threatened to split the EU itself and I would like to sort of combine the answer to steer it to Jean Louis we certainly don't want to decouple but there is an enormous fear that we are being decoupled and it's not a question of patience and are we patient enough to wait for another year or for another five years it is whether in another five years too much would have changed in the rest of the world to simply bring things back to where they were then ten years ago or eight years ago and that will not happen so always trying to be a positive delectation here I think we have to be a little bit thankful to President Trump that he woke us up here in Europe to get our act together and if we manage under the impact of the Trump presidency to get security and defense right in Europe we will have a better starter position for a more symmetric and better partnership with the new president and the US and that is what I am looking forward to for the next generation of patients I mean we should be a little bit more impatient I think with ourselves and probably also with our allies as to the carnivores and the vegetarians I think the vegetarians that survive best are those with teas but it's not about trying to do everything the Americans have been doing in the alliance before it's not about a European strategic deterrent but it is, I mean that would be my priority about a credible capability of Europe in its own geographic environment because we can go on and saying that we are for peaceful solutions and we are and that there is no military solution in Syria which we have been saying for eight years until there was one not one that we wanted we can continue saying that but it's much more credible if we would have the capability to enforce another solution too then we can much more credible work and your question needs an answer how to win back allies also inside Europe and let me give one example where I think that the current French president trying to do the right thing still didn't jump far enough when there was this summit in spring this year between the Chinese president and the French president and Macron did a big and good thing to conquer and miracle to attend I think he should at least have tried to get one of the Visigrad four also to be there that would have made allies inside Europe for something where we know we are not totally on one page but we could easily be so I think that's a way to say if we don't want the 16 out of the 16 plus one to tell us the Germans and the French if you are having your own bilateral relations now why shouldn't we then let's integrate them when we address on the highest level the Chinese president I'm afraid we're out of time I apologize to those who want to ask a question I tried to give time time for questions but never enough but we're running late and I'm under strict instructions to just ask you to thank the panel and thank you as well