Calling the ECB absurd is not out of line

Daniel Drezner complains on his blog that James Surowiecki at the New Yorker is oversimplifying the euro crisis. In particular, Drezner takes exception to Surowiekci's claim that "the problem is not that the E.C.B. can’t act but that it won’t. The obstacles are ideological and, you might say, psychological." Drezner, putting on his hat as a political scientists, responds that "in labeling the problem as one of ‘ideology’ or ‘psychology,’ Surowiecki is explicitly arguing that it's just so absurd that the correct policy is not being pursued."

Although I am both a European specialist who is fully aware of the complexity of the euro crisis and a fellow political scientist, I am not all sympathetic to Drezner's argument. When governments are confronted with a problem that requires public policy to resolve, those governments are faced with different sets of interconnected issues. The first set are the policy issues that arise when you try to find alternative policies that will resolve the problem. The second set are the political issues that arise when actors try to choose between the alternatives and implement the chosen policy. Finding a successful solution to a problem requires overcoming the challenges presented from these different sources.

Surowiecki's frustration with Europe, which mirrors my own, stems from the realization that there are no significant policy issues related to the resolution of euro crisis. There is only one possible short-term policy solution — the ECB acting as lender of last resort — and both theory and experience predict it will work. Europe's failure to implement this solution is entirely the result of politics. Whether it is institutions, interests, or ideology that prevent Europe from acting, it is the politics not the policy that is to blame. It is not out of line to call this situation absurd because the failure by the ECB to act is foolish. It may be rational to the ECB, but a rational decision can still be absurd. And calling the ECB foolish may not help Europe, but it sure feels good if you are as frustrated as Surowiecki and myself.

Taskforce agrees economic governance reforms | European Voice

Sequence is a highly underrated element of politics. The tentative agreement to bolster economic governance in the EU demonstrates this in spades:

There is an agreement that, in a system where fiscal responsibility remains largely under the
responsibility of national authorities, there is a need for a credible enforcement mechanism at the
EU level,” Van Rompuy said after the meeting.

He said that sanctions against member states with high deficit or debt levels “would be introduced at an earlier stage, be more progressive and rely on a wider spectrum of enforcement measures” than under the EU's existing rules for fiscal responsibility, which essentially failed in the run-up to the debt crisis.

Van Rompuy said that governments had agreed that available sanctions should include suspension of EU funds, and that the necessary steps to make this sanction available should be taken “as soon as possible”. He did not clarify, however, which funds would be included in this. The step nevertheless marks a defeat for Spain, Austria, Portugal, Greece and Slovenia, which had argued vehemently against suspending funding, on the grounds that it would further damage a country's weak country's economic performance.

Cutting off EU funding in the middle of an economic crisis is a horrible idea, but if the threat to do so is credible enough states might actually follow the rules. By following the rules, states will be better off economically and there will be no need to cut off funding. For the states bailing out their neighbors, this sequence looks good. For the states being bailed out, this sequence looks bad.

China's aircraft-killing missile is a matter of perspective

For realists, international relations is defined by the constant struggle for power between international actors. For them, the news that China may be near to perfecting an aircraft-carrier-killing missile might be troublesome. According to the AP:

Nothing projects U.S. global air and sea power more vividly than supercarriers. Bristling with fighter jets that can reach deep into even landlocked trouble zones, America's virtually invincible carrier fleet has long enforced its dominance of the high seas.

China may soon put an end to that.

U.S. naval planners are scrambling to deal with what analysts say is a game-changing weapon being developed by China — an unprecedented carrier-killing missile called the Dong Feng 21D that could be launched from land with enough accuracy to penetrate the defenses of even the most advanced moving aircraft carrier at a distance of more than 1,500 kilometers (900 miles).

Analysts say final testing of the missile could come as soon as the end of this year, though questions remain about how fast China will be able to perfect its accuracy to the level needed to threaten a moving carrier at sea.

If China were to develop a missile capable of sinking a U.S. aircraft carrier at sea, it would dramatically alter the balance of power in the world. For balance-of-power realists, this development would signal the need for a possible realignment of U.S. alliances in Asia. For power transition realists, this is a tipping point that makes conflict between the U.S. and China much more likely. Yet, even if we assume the worst case scenario and China perfects this technology by the end of the year, I wonder if it really means anything.

Liberals will point out China is so dependent on the U.S. economically that it would have no real reason to ever use this capability. China can sink our carriers now, theoretically, with its nuclear arsenal, but no one seems to worried about it. Constructivists, on the other hand, might point to the relative obscurity of this article as evidence that while bastions of realism, like the military, are concerned about a rising China, the U.S. and China enjoy a relationship that is based on rivalry, not aggression. As long as that identity holds, conflict remains unlikely. It also means that the mere threat of a change in the relative balance-of-power might not be something to get so worked up about.

Google Earth and Complex Interdependence

One of the more difficult concepts to explain to students is the notion of complex interdependence, or the transformation of international relations through economic and political interdependence. Facilitated by globalization, or the widening, deepening, and accelerating of connections among societies, IR theorists like Robert Keohane and Joseph Nye claim complex interdependence accounts for the decline of military force as a policy tool and the increase in economic interdependence. It also means a gradual reduction in the capacity of states to control events.

In an article in the Washington Monthly entitled "The Agnostic Cartographer,"John Gravois provides a fascinating example of complex interdependence, Google Earth:

That new user-generated system of production, married to the technology of searchable “virtual globes” like Google Earth, has given rise to what people have begun calling “neogeography.” In the colonial era, the mapmaker’s imperative was to tame the foreign wilderness with names and boundaries—to discipline a profusion of facts and claims into a narrow and authoritative set of data. Now the profusion of facts and claims is a feature, not a bug. With the ability to zoom in on visual fields of higher and higher resolution, a digital map can contain more and more information—various local names for the same landmark, personal annotations, a picture of someone’s dog in a field. “The modern era was an era of the expectation that every feature should have a single name, and a top-down authority would determine that,” says Goodchild. “I think we’re moving past that with digital technology.” With policies that often favor ambiguity, Google maintains centralized control over the most official features on its maps—national borders, bodies of water, and the like—while in the “community layer” of map information, users have an open canvas. Geography has been democratized.

Powerful states once determined the names of geographic features. Today, even powerful states are forced to ask Google to change how it has chosen to label certain features or to remove the names given to things by its users if they disagree with the geopolitical ramifications.

When Copyright is Copywrong

Margot Wallström, a Vice President of the European Commission, posted an amusing story about copyright on her blog:

"I had an eventful last weekend. Friday night I saw an impressive performance of “West Side Story” in Berlare together with the Foreign Minister of Belgium and around 2000 other spectators. Every two years there is a festival in Berlare located by Belgium’s one and only natural lake Donkmeer (although a Swede would probably hesitate to call it that…) and a musical performance mixing professional dancers and singers with amateurs.

The producers originally intended to have Flemish and Moroccan gangs as a contemporary twist on this classic story about mistrust between communities. It would have been very meaningful here in Belgium but the copyright holders apparently would not let them so it remained Americans and Puerto Ricans."

Sometimes copyright is so stupid.

How to Read a News Article for International Relations

Note: This is a short handout I made for my students that I thought was useful for a general audience.

International relations is about conflict and cooperation. After reading a news article on world events, you should be able to express in a stylized prisoner's dilemma like the one below whether the actors are in conflict or are cooperating. Over time, you should also be able to offer explanations for why these actors are in conflict or cooperation from each of the three perspectives and from each level of analysis. Doing this requires practice, which you can do by following 5 simple steps while reading an article.

Step 1: Identify the major actors.

Step 2: Identify the major actors' goals or interests. What is it they each want to achieve? Are their goals the same or different?

Step 3: Determine what the payoffs for the actors' interaction will be for each of the four possible outcomes (CC, CD, DC, or DD).

Step 4: Determine which of the four outcomes has happened or will happen. Are the actors cooperating (CC) or are the actors in conflict (CD, DC or DD)?

Step 5: Provide an explanation why this outcome occurred from the realist perspective. How does the liberal perspective explain the same outcome? What about the identity perspective? Don't forget that there are three levels of analysis — the systemic, the domestic, and the individual.

Example

The following example is based on the article "Why Russia is against Kosovo plan" from the June 28, 2007 edition of the Christian Science Monitor.

Step 1: The major actors in this story are the United States (A) (or "the West") and Russia (B).

Step 2: The United States wants security for ethnic Albanians in Kosovo who are threatened if Kosovo remains part of Serbia. Russia wants to avoid setting a precedent that will encourage other ethnic groups to demand independence, especially those inside Russia. Their goals are not the same.

Step 3:

	Cooperate (B)	Defect (B)
Cooperate (A)	Kosovo is secured without having it set a precedent for other groups who want to be independent.	A: Kosovo remains a full part of Serbia. B: Clear message that independence for ethnic minorities will not be tolerated.
Defect (A)	A: Independent, secure, and legitimate Kosovo. B: Precedent allows other ethnic groups to seek independence.	A: Independent Kosovo lacks legitimacy. B: Door left open for others to seek independence.

Step 4: The actors are not cooperating. They are in conflict. The United States has already declared its intention to move ahead with Kosovo's independence, which is a defection. Russia seems poised to defect as well by vetoing approval of Kosovo's independence by the U.N. Thus, the outcome is DD or conflict.

Step 5:

	Realist	Liberal	Identity
Systemic Level of Analysis	Buoyed by oil revenue, Russia is reasserting its authority in international relations to balance the power of the United States.	The current structure of the international system is based on nation-states, which results in the absence of any real alternative to independence for Kosovo.	Russia shares an Orthodox identity with Serbia and does not want to see it dismembered by Kosovo's independence.
Domestic Level of Analysis	Desire by domestic interests in the United States and other Western states to "finish the job" they started by bombing Kosovo and Serbia.	The Russian government's hold on power is based on appearing strong and appeasing Russian nationalists. This requires an aggressive stance towards the West.	Growing nationalism and authoritarianism in Russia have created a climate hostile to the West.
Individual Level of Analysis	Russian president Vladimir Putin is a weak leader who cannot use his position to prevent conflict.	Western leaders have failed to consider the concerns of Russia.	Putin's training as a KGB operative has lead him to view the West as an enemy.

Poland returns to WWII

Poland seems willing to say anything to increase its power in the EU at Germany's expense. Now it's this: "Poland is challenging population-based voting rights in the EU by saying it would have more people if Germany hadn't slaughtered Poles." The BBC has a good summary of the issues facing the European Summit including the Poles' war of words. Der Spiegel has good coverage of the row including the German reaction here and here. Finally, the Center for European Reform has some good advice on what you do with a problem like Poland.

Germany, the Square Root of Poland's Problem

A few months ago, I wrote about Poland's proposal to base voting in the Council of Ministers on the square root of a member state's population. As European leaders meet in Brussels this week for a European Council Summit, Poland's proposal is proving to be the biggest stumbling block in reaching agreement on a mini-treaty to reform the EU's institutions. Below I have compiled some data showing the equivalent votes member states would have in the Council under three different proposals — the current system from the Nice Treaty, under the now dead European Constitution, and under the Polish proposal. You can see from the graph that Poland's proposal is solely aimed at Germany. In fact, both Germany and Poland receive the fewest votes under the Polish proposal.

Spillover in the Mail: EU postal monopolies may end by 2011

Despite its importance to understanding the process of European integration, spillover is a concept many of my students have difficulty grasping. However, I have found a new example that I think demonstrates the concept in an assessable way — the liberalization of postal services in the European Union.

Yesterday, a committee of the European Parliament voted in favor of liberalizing EU postal services across the 27 member bloc in four years time, a move that could eventually mean the end of national monopolies in the delivery of letters and postcards. While there is still several legislative hurdles to overcome before postal services in Europe are opened to private competition, this vote suggests it just a matter of time before liberalization happens. Why would European states want to have standard mail delivered by private firms? Spillover provides a good explanation.

For those who have not taken a class in international relations or European politics, spillover is one of three mechanisms which Neofunctionalism, a theory of regional integration, says drives the integration process. According to neofunctionalists, economic integration between states in one sector creates incentives for integration in further sectors and thus integration in one sector "spills over" into additional sectors. For neofunctionalists, economic integration has simply created pressure to integrate mail delivery.

Mail is a very important part of doing business (In the EU, 90 percent of mail is sent by businesses). This mail could be delivered far more efficiently in Europe if there was a common European-wide postal service, but the Europe Union does not have the capacity or the mandate to provide this service. Therefore, in order to provide European businesses with the efficient postal service their interstate economic integration demands, the EU has to find some way to promote integration of the national postal services. Their solution is to turn to the free-market and let all firms compete for the right to deliver the mail. The fact that businesses operate across national borders in Europe just like business operate across state borders here in the United States makes having a common postal system desirable, but the EU is not the United States so they have to liberalize instead of Europeanize the mail.

Asparagus and European Integration

Harvesting asparagus is an arduous, labor-intensive task. This makes it the kind of job often done by seasonal or migrant workers who are more willing to do this kind of back-breaking labor. For decades, large amounts of German asparagus (it's white!) has been picked by Poles who were willing to do a job many Germans simply refused to do. However, thanks to the EU, German asparagus farmers fear they will not have enough pickers for the harvest:

Walter Heuer, a grower in Lower Saxony, said the movement of job-seeking Poles to the UK and Scandinavia had created problems for German growers.

"Seasonal labour is very strictly regulated here," he complained. "We have lots of paperwork."

German asparagus growers traditionally rely heavily on Polish workers.

The UK especially has experienced an influx of Poles since it opened up its labour market to the new EU member states in 2004.

The shortage of Poles willing to do the work is directly related to the opportunities made available to Polish workers after Poland joined the EU. German farmers are being forced to turn to even poorer EU states like Romania to find workers willing to harvest their asparagus since Poles can make good money doing less labor intensive work in the UK. Unfortunately, workers from Romania do not yet have the same freedom of movement as Polish workers, which results in considerable difficulties for German agriculture.

The solution to this dilemma is very simple: Give all EU workers regardless of their nation of origin complete freedom of movement. This would enable labor to move freely about the continent, giving German farmers greater access to workers. Unfortunately, this solution presents a dilemma of its own: What's to stop the Romanian workers from going to the UK like their Polish counterparts?

This problem has its own solution: Admit Turkey to the EU. The Turks represent a source of labor and demographic stability that Europe desperately needs. Turkey could also benefit from the substantial remittance sent back home by foreign laborers.

Poland misses the "square root" of the problem

By bringing up the issue of how voting should be conducted in the Council of Ministers once again, Poland has done serious damage to their already strained credibility within the EU. Poland's latest proposed is for member states' votes in the Council to be calculated using the square root of a state's population instead of the population itself. This would give Poland much greater influence in Council decisions. Under the rules proposed by the Constitution for Europe, Germany would have 82 votes versus Poland's 38. Under the square root proposal, Germany would have nine votes and Poland six.

While Poland is free to suggest changes to the voting rules, it is the diplomatic temper tantrum that introduced it that hurts Poland's credibility. A senior Polish offical, Ewa Osniecka-Tamecka, told the Polish daily Gazeta Wyborcza:

"If other countries do not want to discuss our proposal, we will take the last resort," Ms Osniecka-Tamecka said, on the possibility of a Polish veto on constitution talks. The new voting plan would be a "Polish historical rebate" for the fact that "for 50 years Poland for no fault of its own was outside EU integration," Mr Cichocki added.

It is statements like this that are quickly earning Poland a reputation in Europe as being uncooperative. Such a reputation is far more damaging to Poland's interests than any voting system. The EU works on consensus and informal negotiations. Being seen as obstructionist and uncooperative will ultimately result in Poland being ignored most of the time. Especially when the decision can be made using a majority vote.

EUobserver.com

The Berlin Declaration, made last Sunday on the occasion of the 50th Anniversary of the signing of the Treaty of Rome, was issued in German and translated into the other 22 official languages of the EU. Such translations are routine in the EU. Normally, the translators strive to make documents linguistically equivalent in all languages. However, it appears the Berlin Declaration may have been subjected to a "political translation" when translated from German:

The declaration, adopted during the celebrations for the 50th anniversary of the Rome Treaties in Berlin on Sunday (25 March), says in German that "We, the citizens in the European Union, are united zu unserem Glück " - which means "united in our fortune/happiness."

However, in the other versions of the text the word Glück has been given a less solemn treatment.

"We, the citizens of the European Union, have united for the better," the more down-to-earth English version says.

The word has also disappeared from the Danish version where Glück has been replaced with ''vor fælles bedste" meaning "for the best" and further down the declaration the word has been lost in translation.

With growing skepticism of the Union, would it be very surprising if European leaders had purposefully chosen to "sanitize" the text for more euroskeptic audiences outside of Germany? No. Since the British and the Danish are the most anti-EU populations in the Union, the English and Danish versions of the declaration would have fallen on deaf ears if they included a statement that Europe was united in its happiness.

With growing skepticism of the Union, is it troubling that EU leaders may have purposefully chosen to "sanitize" the text for more euroskeptic audiences outside of Germany? Yes. The Berlin declaration was supposed to be a simple statement about what binds Europe together, not what sets them apart. The possibility that the German presidency could not draft a statement that cold be made universally in all member states and in all languages suggests that Europe is more divided than popularly thought. If true, there is very little hope for finding the political will to reform the Union institutions before 2009 as the Berlin Declaration implores.

Europe Tries to Bend It Like Beckham in Charity Match

In a charity match celebrating the 50th anniversary of the Treaty of Rome and Manchester United's half century of play in European soccer, England's most storied team beat a squad of European all-stars 4-3. This game was filled with all kinds of symbolism. David Beckham, the world's most popular athlete, played his last game in England against his former team as a member of the Europe XI squad. That the most famous British soccer club defeated a team representing the Europe Union can also be seen as symbolic of Britain's tortured relationship with the EU. In the end, Europe got to celebrate its "birthday" with a good game, but Manchester's victory certainly won't do anything to promote a European identity in one of the most euroskeptic member states.

Oprah Sacks Rome: The Problem with Self-Esteem in Higher Education and Popular Culture

In a mock graduation speech by Neil Postman I assign to students in my sophomore inquiry course, Postman tells his audience they have a choice between being an “Athenian” or a “Visigoth.” The choice to join one of these two tribes is based upon certain values processed by the individual. To an Athenian, contemplation, experimentation, reasoning, and questioning in the quest for knowledge and excellence are activities held in high esteem. To a Visigoth, such activities are valuable only if they help earn you more money or power over others. The less-than-subtle point I hope to make to my students is that the real value of an education is learning to reject their inner-Visigoth and become an Athenian. Unfortunately, our society is failing to produce Athenians and instead is rewarding our most Visigoth-like tendencies.

Take for example the growing belief in higher education that the current generation of students suffers from a self-esteem problem — a problem of too much self-esteem. A new study by San Diego State psychology professor Jean Twenge, timed to coincide with the release of the paperback version of her book Generation Me, contends that current generation of college students are more narcissistic than their Gen X predecessors. While Twenge does not believe students suffer from pathological narcissism, she does make a good case that narcissistic attitudes have increased because of self-esteem programs adopted in elementary schools about 20 years ago.

Despite decades of survey research backing her up, Twenge has come under heavy criticism from some of her colleagues. Marc Flacks, an assistant professor of sociology, told the LA Times he believed that narcissism was too harsh a description for current students. While acknowledging it was important to discuss why our society rewards narcissistic behavior, he concluded, "This is a bottom-line society, so students are smart to seek the most direct route to the bottom line. If you don't have a me-first attitude, you won't succeed." Flacks is clearly arguing that students should choose to be Visigoths because they will be more successful. He also shifts the debate away from the individual to society, absolving students of any sense of self-responsibility or responsibility to others. However, Generation Me's troubling lack of respect for others (especially authority figures) is not their biggest problem.

My experiences in the classroom suggest Generation Me's biggest problem really is their lack of respect for scholarly knowledge and intellectual inquiry as in end in and of itself. They simply do not see the value in choosing to be an Athenian. This is reflected in a growing anti-intellectualism among students fostered, in part, I think by the refusal of their parents or high school teachers to ever tell them they are wrong or to correct them. Students seem to believe that all points of view are equally valid, no matter what. Gary A. Olson writes in the Chronicle of Higher Education about a typical exchange between a professor and a student:

The student's peremptory dismissal -- "Well, that's his opinion" -- is not an aberration. That assertion and the attitude it embodies have become endemic, not only in society at large but in academe. Apparently, nowadays an opinion will trump a fact, a reasoned argument, an empirically verified observation -- even a treatise by an eminent scholar. An opinion is the great equalizer, and everyone has one. It silences all arguments, squelches all dialogue: That's your opinion. End of discussion.

Olson points out that it is not just students who believe all opinions are equally valid. Faculty members and administrators are not immune from this new anti-intellectualism. Faculty who are denied tenure for failing to meet certain tenure standards are increasingly suing their universities because they feel their negative evaluations are just someone's opinion.

Unfortunately, this anti-intellectualism is not restricted to the higher education. Students merely reflect the society in which they live. One highly visible pop culture example of the self-esteem movement's anti-intellectualism is Oprah Winfrey's devotion to a book called The Secret. The secret of this self-help book is that people need only visualize what they want in order to get it. In a scathing review of the book on Salon.com, Peter Birkenhead points out an obvious problem with this philosophy that seems to take being a Visigoth to an entirely new level:

[The Secret] is indistinguishable from, and inextricably bound up in the Oprah idea of self-esteem, the kind of confidence you get not from testing yourself, but from 'believing' in yourself. This modern idea of faith isn't arrived at the old-fashioned way, by asking questions, but by getting answers. Instead of inquiry we have born-again epiphanies and cheesy self-help books -- we have excuses for not engaging in inquiry at all. Let other people schlep down the road to Damascus; we'll have Amazon send Damascus to us."

The self-esteem movement and pop-psychobabble like The Secret are just one source of the growing anti-intellectualism in our society. Conservatism and certain forms of Evangelical Christianity are another. From topics ranging from evolution to global warming, many conservatives and Evangelical Christians, demand "objective and unbiased" media coverage and school instruction. The problem is the truth, which by definition is always unbiased, it is not always objective. When conservatives admonish school boards to "teach the debate" they ignore the fact that not everything is a debate with two or more equally valid sides. A lot of time there is, but not always. Insisting that there are fits well with the philosophy of The Secret — if you just visualize the existence of a debate long enough it will become the truth. In other words, denying that global warming is a reality will eventually make it go away. Or global warming is "just your opinion."

There is a growing belief in higher education that the current generation of students suffers from a problem of too much self-esteem. While I agree students seem to be getting more self-absorbed over time, their narcissism is not the biggest problem. It is their lack of intellectual curiosity and their unwillingness to engage in the most basic forms of inquiry that pose the greatest challenge to society. Encouraged by the self-help movement, a lack of criticism from their parents and teachers, pop culture icons like Oprah, and a media that panders to conservatives students are embracing, not rejecting their inner-Visigoth. When called on it by an Athenian, they see no harm in this. All I can say to this is I hope Oprah realizes in the end, she is sacking Rome.

Riots in the "Happiest Place on Earth"

Just last summer, Denmark was being called the "happiest place on earth." That isn't much solace to the citizens of Copenhagen who are witnessing the worst violence in a decade:

As the smoke and tear gas cleared Saturday morning, the police said 188 people were arrested overnight, while more than 200 were arrested the day before …

“In the last 10 years we haven’t had riots like we’ve seen in the past two days,” a police spokesman, Flemming Steen Munch, said.

The violence started Thursday after a police antiterror squad evicted squatters from a downtown building that for years had been a popular cultural center for anarchists, punk rockers and left-wing groups.

The eruption of violent riots in Denmark is a very troubling to me, although its full meaning eludes me. Perhaps it suggests that the serious social issues behind the far more violent riots in France last year are not as isolated as Europeans like to think. The willingness of disaffected youth in Scandinavia, of all places, to resort to violence to challenge state authority does not seem like a good omen for Europe's future.

Dutch Voters Turn to the Internets

If you thought voting was hard here, try voting in Netherlands where voters have to chose between 24 different parties. Dutch voters seem to be understandably confused and a large number are turning to the Internet and sites that match voter and party:

At one site, called Vote Matcher, users answer multiple-choice questions. Based on the results, the site then suggests which party best represents the user's views. Another site, Voting Compass, offers a variant: after offering choices on a range of political topics, it shows where the user fits in the political landscape.


Each of the sites, which opened a month ago, has reported almost three million visitors, a significant number in a country with 12 million eligible voters. Those figures do not count the results from 13 other similar sites.

The sudden popularity of the voting guides in this democratic nation of outspoken citizens not known as wallflowers in politics, has baffled even seasoned analysts. Could this be just another set of computer games, or is this serious soul-searching?

"I think it's both," said Andre Krouwel, a professor of political science at the Free University in Amsterdam, who designed the Voting Compass site. "We are taken aback by the large numbers. It seems that people seem unsure, that they are trying to get a handle on a panorama that has become more complex with the boom in new small parties."

National opinion polls appear to confirm the wavering of many voters.
In the latest polls, released Monday, almost one-third of the people questioned said they had not decided whom to vote for.

The big question in my mind is: Do these sites work? This is scarily related to my dissertation which included an entire chapter on the accuracy of Dutch voters' vote choice. They did pretty good, scoring much higher than British or American voters.

Parliament gets review of Implementation

Link: EUobserver.com.


The European Parliament is set on Thursday (6 July) to approve a major institutional deal granting MEPs the right to block European Commission measures implementing existing EU laws - such as the approval of GMOs on the EU market.

The deal concerns the commission's so-called implementing powers, which the parliament and member states sometimes grant to the commission when they agree on a new EU law.

The Social Construction of University Reputation

Philip Ebels argues that one of the reasons that European universities lag behind the rest of the world is a result of "the difficulties one might encounter explaining one’s academic credentials at a European cocktail party." In other words, since the name of a degree conferred by the university system of one country is so different from the others there is a decline in quality. This argument makes little sense to me. American universities are not superior to European ones because a BA means the same thing in Montana as it does in Iowa. Rather the real reason that European universities lag behind American ones is reputation. It's a social construction based on self-fulfilling prophecy.

End of Democracy in Britain?

A columist for the Guardian is claiming that a new bill in Parliament will rip the heart out of parliamentary democracy. Sounds like modern government to me.

Presidential Ambitions and Student Riots in France

For weeks, French students have been protesting a new labor law that allows for some workers under the age of 26 to be fired at will during their first two years of employment (France has strong rules protecting workers against dismissal). In the last few days, the labor unions connected with France's Communist Party have begun to side with the students. There have even been calls for general strikes, an escalation of the general labor militancy found in France. French Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin at first refused to back down, heightening the crisis.

This kind of crisis is common in France. The conflict has reminded many of the standoff between French students and workers against Charles de Gaulle in the late 1960s. One possibility for why de Villepin has been so intransigent is that he sees himself as another de Gaulle. In fact, de Villepin is trying to raise his credibility among French conservatives who are hostile to the labor unions (a trait he shares with de Gaulle) because France will be holding a presidential election next year. De Villepin is staking his claim as de Gaulle's successor and trying to distinguish himself from his first round opponents from his own and other right parties. A victory over the unions would have essentially guaranteed him a free pass into the second round of the election.

 Unfortunately for de Villepin, the idea has proven so unpopular with the French public that he has been forced to consider changing the law. He wants to find a compromise, perhaps by shortening the two year period of the law. However, doing so will be viewed as caving to the unions, which will be a major buzz kill in the election.

UPDATED 3-27-06 with some news story links and corrected title.