Everybody knows the famous American 911. But do you know we have such an emergency phone number in the European Union ?

This number is the  112. You can use it to call the police, in case of fire or in medical emergency and is available in every country member of the Union (even in the newcomer Romania) except Bulgaria, which has started taking steps to introduce it. You can call this number either with a fixed phone or with a mobile phone and you should be located by emergency services in both cases.

Unlike in the US, Europeans do not share the same language and that is the first challenge (especially in the Eastern and Central European countries but France should improve that too) : the operator will have to speak with its first language (at least) a really good English without any accent in order to understand you and take the appropriate measures to save you. In a case of emergency, when you cannot find even your words in your first language, this becomes a more difficult situation in English.

Moreover, the marketing around this great idea is not sufficient. Given the increasing mobility of European citizens within the EU, we need this common tool to save lives, wherever we are. This number should be taught to kids at school and be advertised everywhere to eventually replace the old national numbers.

Unity, step by step…

Bulgaria is one of those Eastern European ex-communist countries that lately joined the European Union. The reasons why they did it are quite simple :
- they are aiming at political stability.
- they want to be part of a huge and powerful economic zone that could bring them welfare and growth.
- they want to be protected from the Russian ex-”big brother” who did not them only good.

Even though Bulgaria and Romania were not completely ready to join the Union, they now are in and it is good to have them : the European family is now about to be complete.
Some of the newcomers reproached (rightly somehow) the European Union its politic weakness and its incapacity to form a solid bulwark against Russia, the former oppressor.

This story of Bulgarian medics who were imprisoned for some doubtful reasons in Libya was THE opportunity for the EU to show the world and itself its political power. The negotiations with the Libyan authorities went to their end when France decided to send the wife of the president, Nicolas Sarkozy, to accelerate the process.

What the hell was she doing here ? Have you ever seen Mrs. Bush intervene in any political crisis in the world ? What kind of legitimacy does she have to negotiate with one dictator ?

The EU could have improved its credibility and its unity at the same time. We could have shown the world that we can stand together when our citizens are in danger and thus ensure Eastern European countries our will to protect them. It did it partially (one of the nurse told “if Bulgaria would not have been in the EU, we would not be free now”) but this European victory is, in my opinion, blurred by the French attitude.

When will we have a real common foreign policy ? When will France stop sending French troops in Africa (or the president’s wife) and will pass the relay to the European Union ? When will German, French and British soldiers fight, for instance, together in Afghanistan for the blue and yellow flag and in the name of the EU ?

I am not naive, this not going to happen tomorrow, but it is what we must strive for.

Since April 2007, Nicolas Sarkozy is the new president of the French republic. In my opinion, his election and the following deputies’ election are a sign of the not-that-all-democratic character of the French institutions.

- The leader of the centrist party (MoDem - democratic movement), Francois Bayrou, collected 18 percent of the votes at the first round of the presidential election. His party, that has now 3 seats on a total of 577 in the French lower house of the parliament, is now struggling in order not to disappear.
- According to the medias, Nicolas Sarkozy won a “crushing victory”. This is not true, unless you consider 46,93 percent of the electors who voted for his opponent, Ségolène Royal, are peanuts. This is a victory, but it could be wise for Sarkozy to take millions of people in consideration.
- The majority of people who voted for the deputies of the lower house of the parliament voted for left-wing parties. However, due to the geographical repartition of the seats, Sarkozy’s right-wing party, the UMP won 345 of the 577 seats. How representative and legitimate can be this parliament ?

The UMP won these elections. Fine. The problem is : how did the UMP win ? Nobody seem to care in France, that one party is trusting the whole power, even if it became less votes !

France needs to change its constitution : its institutions must become more decentralized, more democratic and more representative of its population.

After his election, the new French president claimed he wanted to “handle” and create a “tax shock”, in order to boost the economic growth.

In fact, France will try to pay its tax cuts by making more and more debts. Even in a period when the growth is booming and the employment rate is growing, the French are about to continue to dig the huge hole of debts they are already standing in.
Sarkozy claimed about France’s difficult financial situation : “you will judge me only at the end of my presidency”. This sounds extremely vague and it would be an error not to benefit from the current positive economic situation to refund some money.

France suffers from its huge number of civil servants, though the government promised to divide their number by two in the future. This is fine because the mass of civil-servants in France is a structural problem, but I really hope these cuts will not affect, for instance, hospitals or universities.
On the contrary it is not the role of the state to deliver electricity or to run the trains in the country. Sell companies like the SNCF or EDF could be a good way to raise funds to get rid of some civil servants, not to employ more of them though !

For the French who read these few lines, you will be pleased to know that even though German civil servant are employed for a lifetime, they do not have the right to strike !

On an international level, Sarkozy’s efforts to save the Constitution (or what is left of it) were good. Nonetheless, France’s budget is a hot topic in Europe. French people may think their financial condition is their own problem, but it is not anymore. According to Sarkozy’s prime minister Fillon, France must get one percent more growth this year, so its government will take the right to get rid of its commitment to the reduction of the debt. We now all have the same money and the credibility of the Euro must be guaranteed by all countries of the Euro-zone, including France, which is one of the most important.

I hope Sarkozy will pursue its effort to save the European constitution, but the financial difficulties of the French state are worrying and the president should use the current economic situation to clean up this mess.

As a French-German student, I have been experiencing some interesting differences of moral values and point of views. During four years, we (the students) have been told about French-German friendship, the historical base of this relationship and how positive all this has been during 50 years. Nonetheless I would put this affirmation of friendship in perspective from a critical point of view : first within both societies, then from a political and finally from an economical point of view.

Even if German and French are not seen as a hostile horde of aggressive enemies within the populations anymore, neither are they seen as friends. The percentage of pupils who choose German or French as first foreign language to learn at school at the age of 11 is very tiny. This choice is often motivated because, as German is harder to learn, the best pupils are put together in the best German-speaking classes.
Although people know the same American musicians, the national artists are almost unknown on the other side of the border. There is a very good reason for it : there is no common public sphere and no common medias. Even though Arte is a bi national TV channel, its content is mainly focused on culture and it is not really a mass media, which could bring both populations closer.
In both countries, normal citizens can give the name of one or two politicians of the other countries (at best). Negative nicknames such as the “boches”, “teutons”, and so on for the French and “Franzacken” for the German still remain within the populations.
Of course, not all French and German people dislike each other : German like the way French people live and especially how French people enjoy life. There is a typical German saying to describe this pleasant situation : “to live like God in France”. French people, on the other hand, admire the German organization and their economical power. But most of these statements are stereotypes, indeed, French and German people simply do not really know each other.

Since the signature of the Elysée’s treaty in 1963, both countries tried to maintain the myth of a French-German friendship. Though the couples de Gaulle/Adenauer, Schmidt/Giscard d’Estaing, Kohl/Mitterand, have brought the political elites closer, the majority of the French and German populations are indifferent to each other. Even ministers are not able to speak each other’s language. The last high-ranked French minister of the education who could, was Luc Ferry in 2002. Angela Merkel can speak Russian because she comes from the former German Democratic Republic, but not French : hence, where can both populations find examples of a strong friendship ?
Furthermore, the political cooperation between both countries is not as intensive as expected. In fact, both countries have often the same policy and stand together on consensual subjects (the nuclear program of Iran for example) . Nevertheless, inside the EU, France makes sure that Germany does not take too much power . There is a flavor of mistrust in this political relationship, which absolutely does not match with a friendship.

France and Germany are both the most important economic partner to each other. Nevertheless, the trust in this partnership on both side of the border is reduced. For instance, the French Government openly backed the merger of the French pharmaceutical group Sanofi-Sythelabo with Aventis (which was already a Franco-German company) in order to create a “national champion”, which could compete internationally with giants of the sector. On the contrary, when Alsthom (a train manufacturer) faced severe financial problems, the French economy minister Sarkozy prevented Siemens from buying it and urged banks to grant loans. Nowadays medias talk about this operation as a success how Alsthom has been “saved” by the French government. The question is : saved from what ? From more european integration ? If a big Indian company, for instance, wants to buy Alsthom : can Alsthom resist alone or will the government back it again, this time with even more protectionist measures ?
I think this position is not responsible in the long term. The more European companies stand together and merge with each other, the more the will be able to challenge international giants.

The next example of a (mostly) bi national cooperation is Airbus. By the way, it is funny to see how French people are persuaded that Airbus is a French company, forgetting the thousands of jobs in Germany, Spain and the United Kingdom.
This company is currently facing severe financial difficulties and it is interesting to see how both French and German governments get involved in a strict internal problems. In my opinion, not the Prime Minister but the executive director has to announce job cuts. The politicians must garantee that Airbus strictly remains European, because aircrafts are not a normal business. But the rest is a matter of business and not of politics.

To conclude this economic part, I would say that German and French companies (and sometimes involving governments) are quite rough with each other, forgetting that if they would play together and fair, without even thinking about any friendship, they could compete internationally.

We have two choices : either governments must find the means in order to bring both countries closer.

• They have to support the teaching of French or German in their countries, and could create common mass medias (radios and TV channels).
• On a political level, they must stop to mistrust each other and try to build an European unity.
• Then from an economical point of view, governments should not get involved in companies’ policies.

Or instead of using the word friendship, choosing the word partnership, which suits much better to this relationship and hope that the European Union will continue its unification without a strong Paris/Berlin axis…