We should always keep things in perspective

12 April 2018

Hans Kundnani has a thoughtful analysis of what he perceives as the troubling transformation of the EU (March 28, 2018). The crust of his argument is that reforms in recent years have amplified the influence of Germany, while the EU is being refashioned as an IMF-like body for rule enforcement. Pro-europeans, he opines, need to be aware of the content and consequences of the European integration process. Clinging on to the simplistic narrative of “more Europe” as a necessary good in itself, does not help the cause of a united Europe, because it ultimately benefits German interests.

Kundnani’s advice for looking into the specifics is sound. It

Progressives must change with the times

4 April 2018

I read with great interest Rui Teixeira’s Five Theses for a New Left (April 4, 2018). The author argues forcefully for a holistic rethink of the left’s role in modern politics. And while broadly in agreement, I think the left needs a bit more than what he proposes.

At first, we are experiencing a systemic shift in our economies, with services becoming the most important sector. The irreducible factor of this industry is data. Whether we speak about financial services, where information and timeliness make all the difference in investments, or the rise of corporate behemoths such as Google and Facebook, data is the new quintessential enabler

On the abstract structure of the core tenets of modern politics

29 March 2018

I just updated the books’ section of this website to include my latest work on political philosophy.

The Structured Text on Sovereignty, Nationhood, Statehood (STSNS) explores the core tenets of modern politics—sovereignty, nationhood, statehood—in an attempt to form a better understanding of the bigger picture of political phenomena.

This short book seeks to provide an impetus for further reflection on a series of issues that relate to the following metapolitical research questions:

Who governs?
Where is the locus of power?
Now, you may wonder why bother with political philosophy in the age of ephimeral interest

The Executive Board must be representative of the euro area

1 February 2018

The process has already started for the replacement of the current members of the European Central Bank’s Executive Board. There seems to be a lot of inter-governmental bargaining behind the scenes, though nothing specific for legislators to examine. The standard procedure for appointing the new Executive Board is opaque and deprives the European Parliament from adequately scrutinising the nominees.

In a January 23, 2018 article for the civil society platform QE for People, Stanislas Jourdan argues forcefully that the the election of ECB board members is in urgent need of reform:

The nomination process of ECB board

Progressives have to take the initiative

30 January 2018

In a January 22, 2018 article for Social Europe,1 László Andor takes a closer look at the vague concept of “austerity”. Its polysemy creates confusion and obfuscates the truth of what policy mix is being pursued or implemented. Austerity means different things to different people and, consequently, is an inappropriate term both for formulating policy as well as criticising certain measures or the conventional wisdom.

Mr. Andor’s scintillating analysis can be read as a partial critique of the powers that be, though it applies just as well to people on the left of the political spectrum. Progressives could not put forward a credible

Important reforms on the horizon

28 January 2018

Towards the end of 2017, the presidents of the three EU institutions involved in law-making—Commission, Parliament, Council—signed a Joint Declaration on the EU’s legislative priorities for 2018-19. This is the second time in a row such a document is agreed upon. It signals the commitment of the institutions to complete ongoing initiatives in line with the Union’s current objectives before the conclusion of the current parliamentary term (new elections in May 2019).

The accompanying working document encompasses seven areas of policy and includes proposals that are carried over from the previous declaration, as well as some new ones. The domains

EU must do more in key areas and leave the rest to the Member States

23 January 2018

On January 18, 2018 the European Commission appointed six members to its task force on subsidiarity and proportionality.1 The purpose of this working group is to develop proposals in line with scenario 4 of the Commission’s White Paper on the Future of Europe.2 This is about the EU level being involved in fewer areas of policy, but becoming more effective at its tasks.

The working group will deliver its findings by mid-July of this year. The expectation is that EU policy priorities will be reordered accordingly. Power over certain issues may be re-delegated to the Member States. The resulting resource savings

Legitimate criticism should not be grouped together with demagogy

16 January 2018

In a January 9, 2018 column for Project Syndicate, Dani Rodrik makes a strong case for what he terms “economic populism”.1 Populists, he argues, are united by their universal opposition to constraints on the executive. The will of the people, which the government represents, is considered absolute, boundless. Couched in those terms, Rodrik starts by describing the dangers of “political populism”, such as the erosion of the rule of law and the dismantling of fundamental rights. Political populism is a form of tyranny. He then examines the pros and cons of economic populism, to ultimately suggest that there are

Pro-europeans must make a strong case for European democracy

12 January 2018

The Summit of Southern European Union countries consists of Cyprus, France, Greece, Italy, Malta, Portugal, and Spain. It is an informal platform for coordination on European policy. These states face many common challenges and are united by their largely pro-European ambition to work towards a stronger Europe.

Given the option for differentiated integration (multi-speed Europe),1 it is refreshing to have a group of states make concrete steps towards ever closer union. Pro-europeans have been on the defensive for far too long, having to resist demagogues and reactionaries of all sorts. The future of Europe cannot be

Complexity favours inter-governmentalism

11 January 2018

The idea of a multi-speed Europe is not new. In fact, it is not just an idea but a general description of the current state of the integration process. We have euro and non-euro countries. Those who are members of the passport-free Schengen Area and those who are not. And so on. More recently, there have been breakthroughs in European defence policy, with an agreement on establishing a Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO). This too is among a subset of all EU Member States.

The trend will not be reversed any time soon. Differentiated integration is considered standard practice. The Treaties themselves recognise as much, with their

Effective sovereignty must have normative qualities

9 January 2018

There is this view, mostly among economists, which holds that Europe’s real problem is the lack of financial integration. Private capital remains intimately linked to its domestic economy and, by extension, to the nation state. The two become inter-dependent. The resulting feedback loop was evident at the height of the eurocrisis and remains a major concern to this day due to its pernicious side effects. As such, the thinking goes, financial integration at the European level will sever the link between domestic public finances and private capital. Nation states within the EU will no longer find themselves tied to the fate of

Distribution of competences in the EU federal system
Advanced issues of political organisation (POL413)

31 December 2017

Hello, my name is Protesilaos Stavrou. In this seminar I will talk about the European Union’s vertical separation of powers. It is based on the legal principles of conferral, subsidiarity, and proportionality. These govern the distribution of competences in the EU. They do, in other words, regulate which level of state does what over any given area of policy covered by the European Treaties.

Drawing from the last three seminars on the interlocking aspects of sovereignty and statehood, I will critically assess the function of these principles in relation to the key

The page you’re looking for could not be found (404)

The page you’re looking for could not be found.
The resource that you are attempting to access does not exist or you don’t have the necessary permissions to view it.
Make sure the address is correct and that the page hasn’t moved.
Please contact your GitLab administrator if you think this is a mistake.
Go back

What constitutes a state, federal system, and republic
Advanced issues of political organisation (POL412)

24 October 2017

Hello, my name is Protesilaos Stavrou. In this seminar I will talk about what makes up a state and what is the impact of its recognition by third parties. Then I will apply the analysis to the case of the European Union, to examine whether it is a state or a “sui generis” entity as some experts suggest.

It should be noted right at the outset that the term “state” is polysemous. In this context, it is used to signify a political order that can ultimately act as a player in international politics. This would typically rule out administrative units of federal systems,

About the criteria for national indivisibility and the normative grounds for secession

16 October 2017

Hello, my name is Protesilaos Stavrou. In this seminar I will talk about the parameters of a uniform polity; the normative criteria for maintaining a national compact and the conditions that may justify unilateral secession from a state. To proceed, I shall first describe the desired modality of sovereignty within a political whole: in other words, what exactly provides a moral basis for the exercise of supreme political authority.

The nation state is the unit of sovereignty in global politics. Indeed we refer to politics on that scale as “international”, as being between nations: a reference to the

Applying the distinction between headline and effective sovereignty

12 October 2017

In this seminar I want to talk about how to evaluate international relations. To present ways of thinking about the effects of cross-border policies; to examine the interplay between states and corporations in an ever connected world. The evaluation is made in relation to the nation state and its capacity to exercise supreme political authority, or else sovereignty.

To proceed with the analysis, we need a concept of sovereignty that accounts for the actual power a state can wield compared to the normative claims it may have. By that I mean that there is a distinction to be made between two facets of sovereignty, namely,

Arguments with a depoliticised undertone

26 August 2017

On August 25, 2017, the President of the European Central Bank, Mario Draghi, delivered a speech at the Economic Policy Symposium of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, Jackson Hole.1 Mr. Draghi’s theme was the openness of domestic economies to global trade, a prerequisite to realising the potential for sustained growth in the face of technological convergence and structural challenges.

The ECB chief draws from the experience of the European integration process to suggest that openness can deliver the normative ends of fairness, safety, and equity, provided there are shared institutions at the supranational level. The harmonisation of

Summer reading on EU politics and beyond

15 August 2017

I have not posted anything on this blog for about a month. The reason is that I have been busy with other things. I should resume regular blogging towards the end of this month or the beginning of September.

In the meantime, you might be interested in some of my recent publications in the books section of this website.

The first is the Dialogues on EU politics, published on July 1, 2017. This book will appeal to advanced students of European affairs, citizens with a keen interest in the European Union, and even professionals working in the field who are looking for new ideas or perspectives on the integration process. The Dialogues

The United States’ Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has plans to put an end to the era of Net Neutrality. The idea is to allow Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to discriminate against different types of users or content, in order to allocate bandwidth where they consider it necessary.

This is particularly dangerous. ISPs will be in a position to effectively rig the entirety of communication and exchange to suit their agenda. Consumers who do not qualify as ‘worthy enough’ will have to make do with a slower and smaller Internet, as resources are allocated towards those favoured by the ISPs. You would want to visit, for example, this website only to be notified that it is outside your current data plan.

Net Neutrality is the prerequisite for a free [digital] market. Any

Acting on behalf of the Estonian presidency of the EU, the Lisbon Council has opened up a feedback process on e-government in order to gather the input of citizens. The suggestions are collected and will be presented to the EU Member States. The deadline for submissions is July 14, 2017. Chances are that some ideas will make it into the final text, expected to be signed on October 6, 2017.

Below are my extended contributions to the original text. A short notice on methodology is in order. The original is first quoted verbatim and then what follows is either the paragraph written anew or with my additions inline. The latter use strong emphasis (bold typeface). The § section sign is used to reference the number of the paragraph in question. Every amendment of mine starts with either

I just published a new book about European affairs: Dialogues on EU politics. Its content is an extension of the work done on this blog. Some of the most pertinent issues of the EU and the integration process are subjected to scrutiny, to draw conclusions of a technical as well as a theoretical sort.

The Dialogues is a series of six fictional discussions between friends. The dialogical format has been chosen as a good alternative to the essay. My intention is to test the hypothesis that the dialogue allows the reader to better follow the line of reasoning and even draw their own additional conclusions from it.

The book is made available as a web-based publication. It looks exactly like a concatenation of blog posts. There is, nonetheless, a print-optimised page for those who prefer

On June 7, 2017 the European Commission published a “reflection paper” on the future of Europe’s defence and security policy.1 This is the fourth in the series.2 It builds on a number of initiatives that were launched in the second half of last year regarding the further integration of European Security and Defence Policy (CSDP), as well as the White Paper on the future of the EU. The overarching theme is to lay the foundations of a holistic re-imagination of the European project once this election year is over and to proceed towards the next phase of [deeper] integration by 2025.

The reflection paper itself offers precious little in terms of new content and fresh ideas. Everything it touches on has been covered at greater length in previous publications, notably the EU Global

On May 31, 2017 the European Commission published its third reflection paper about the future of the integration process.1 This one concerns the reform of the Economic and Monetary Union.2 Overall, it is a decent piece of work, one that combines constructive self-criticism, factual accuracy, and pragmatic suggestions for the way forward. The Commission has recognised the shortcomings of the initial EMU setup, has internalised the relevant debates on past mistakes and future prospects, and is showing willingness to act.

While an official document, the reflection paper on EMU reform, reads like an independent analysis of the state of play and of the potential states of affairs.3 That is a great positive, for it does not commit the fallacy of withdrawing the EU level from scrutiny.

In ages past, security and defence were thought about in terms of one nation’s army versus another’s. National borders delineated what could be understood as spheres of security and control. The construct of the nation state provided the political legitimacy and sense of belonging to that lifeworld.

In the modern era, such a symmetric view of security and defence can only hold true if considered part of a greater picture. State versus state is no longer the norm. Asymmetric warfare, such as 9/11 or the recent Islamic State attacks in European cities, point to the diffusion of the dichotomy between internal and external scopes of security and defence.

The lines are blurred even further by the growing importance—indeed the ubiquity—of cyber space. Hacker groups, be they state

On May 10, 2017 the European Commission published its reflection paper on harnessing globalisation.1 It is the second such document in a series (the first one being about the EU’s social dimension).2 The idea is to provide all the information and data that will inform the decisions on Europe’s future priorities. The EU is at a crossroads. All sides seem to agree that the status quo is unsustainable. Disagreements are about the Union’s outlook. Either Europe will proceed with deepening its integration to some degree, or it will have to somehow be refashioned so that national governments regain certain competences. Once this election year reaches its close, the EU is expected to proceed with a range of reforms. The December 2017 European Council will likely provide the impetus for the

About Thomas Colignatus
Thomas Colignatus is the science name of Thomas Cool, an econometrician (Groningen 1982) and teacher of mathematics (Leiden 2008), Scheveningen, Holland. His papers on economics are at MPRA and RePEc and papers on mathematics education research are at Zenodo.

I have been in contact with Thomas Colignatus,1 since 2011.2 He is an econometrician, teacher of mathematics, and researcher of mathematics education. My impression of what I have seen of his work is that of an inquisitive and original thinker. The kind of person who can exercise common sense yet still think ‘outside the box’ and use a sound basis in science. That is the sort of approach we need more of. Sensible arguments to diffuse the polarisation of public opinion and to improve the political process.

I was thus intrigued to read his recent contribution on the topic of Brexit.3 In that article Thomas suggests that there is a key problem with the Brexit referendum. The question put for voting was overly simplistic in that it presented a binary that failed to capture the complexity of the issue. But, above all, the underlying political science did not make the crucial distinction that he highlights between voting and deciding.

On April 26, the European Commission published two much anticipated documents: (i) the recommendation on the European Pillar of Social Rights, and (ii) the reflection paper on the social dimension of Europe.1

The former is meant to be a standalone legal text that will incorporate the basic social rights of European citizens. If adopted, it can be likened to the social policy equivalent of the European Charter of Fundamental Rights—an integral part of European citizenship.

As for the reflection paper, it is the first in a series of complementary publications to the Commission’s White Paper on the future of the European Union.2 Each reflection paper focuses on a certain area of policy, exploring the state of affairs and outlining the options for European integration in the near future. The idea is to prepare for the December 2017 European Council were much about the future of the European integration process will likely be determined.

The EU has the right to act on social policy

Social policy is central to the European project, both in a legal and a normative sense. The Treaties provide for a number of provisions on such matters as gender balance, non-discrimination in the workplace, equal opportunities, and the like, while there already exists a rich corpus of relevant legislation.

A recent article by Lídia Brun and Mario Ríos about the false dilemma between neoliberal globalisation and nationalist protectionism got me thinking about the emerging patterns of right wing politics, the dominant narratives of our time, the challenges the left is confronted with and, more generally, the direction capitalism seems to be taking.1 It is indeed easy to fall into the trap of being distracted from what really matters. Simplistic, binary thinking greatly diminishes the quality of the public debate. It hampers any effort to formulate a more eclectic, considered position. Nuance is lost as the extremes become louder. Important information and the details of policy are largely ignored as controversies centre on headline issues. Hence the ease with which demagogues manage to muster the voting strength to influence the agenda.

The Trump presidency, Brexit and the exaggerations underpinning it, the rise of ‘illiberalism’ within the European Union—with ‘illiberalism’ being a euphemism for legally refined fascism—, the strong presence of the extreme right in France. The narratives that define right wing politics, and by extension the public debate are shifting. Nationalist sentiment is on the rise, even if the model of the Westphalian nation-state is no longer as relevant.

The Summit of Southern European Union countries is an informal platform that brings together the heads of state or government of Cyprus, France, Greece, Italy, Malta, Portugal, and Spain. On April 10 it held its third meeting in Madrid. The declaration that came out of it is of particular importance, especially in terms of the symbolic significance of southern EU countries coordinating their actions on the European front.1

As was so readily apparent during the height of the euro crisis, and more recently on issues of migration and asylum, these countries do have many things in common. Working together only improves their chances of finding optimal solutions at the supranational level while contributing to the overall balance of influence and perspectives within the EU.

The EU remains open to major reforms

Naysayers may argue that this Summit is a few years late, particularly on economic issues. Austerity was allowed to became the default EU agenda. The Fiscal Compact and the legislation underpinning economic governance are all focused on budgetary discipline and fiscal rigidity. For some, the euro itself is the embodiment of neoliberalism, at least insofar as the lack of monetary sovereignty at the national level forces the government to cope with macroeconomic adjustments by relying on fiscal means (i.e. spending cuts).

The USA has struck against positions in Syria, presumably as a response to the latest chemical attack. Given President Trump’s u-turn on military intervention, and the overall unilateralism of the American policy, one cannot be certain as to what happens next. The escalation of the crisis, or anyhow the deterioration to an even worse state of affairs, cannot be excluded. In the face of this new chapter in the tragedy that is the war in Syria, the European Union should unequivocally stand for the respect of international law and only promote multilateralism as a means of arriving at a compromise agreement that will end hostilities.

There are a number of reasons calling for restraint and deliberation.

At first, the responsibility over the chemical attacks has not been clarified. A thorough investigation into the matter is needed, following approval by the United Nations. A failure to do so carries great risks, not least the ad hoc substitution of international cooperation by superpower unilateralism. The claims of the US administration, just as those of all the other sides involved in the conflict, cannot be taken at face value. Sufficient evidence is a prerequisite.

Secondly, President Trump’s ambiguous rhetoric and self-contradictions regarding foreign policy suggest that no long term plan exists, at least not one that the public is aware of.