It feels always good to hear we left footprints and we are definitely stronger together !

Here is a thank you letter from Kaltrina Morine from Kosovo, a student in University of Pristina who discovered about our project ’The Advocacy for Young People in Kosovo”. We are more than honored to publish it, share the support it give us and say thank you back to you Kaltrina. We will continue to support young kosovar for a sustainable Kososvo and together we will make a change.

“This summer in Kosovo” – “Sustainable Kosovo conference”

Dear  Mrs.Stephanie

I am Kaltrina Morina from Kosovo- Pristine. I am a student in University of Pristine in Kosovo. Today as I was exploring through internet, I found and read an article about the project that ThinkYoung organized which took place in Kosovo – ‘The Advocacy for Young People in Kosovo”.
Personally, I want to thank you about the idea of organizing it here as you know we have many problems for example young
unemployment  and this is what is happening to me right now cause I am unemployed
Project like you have organized are always welcomed to us because we can share our ideas and experiences with other young people
from Europe here in Kosovo as far as we still cannot travel without visa. But we are trying to make possible to move freely and study
abroad which is my biggest wish, to study Master somewhere in EU but our possibilities, unfortunately, are limited.

We know that only youngsters can bring changes and so we are trying to do. But we really need your help. European Help.
I am sad because I couldn’t be part of you project but I  hope that you will organize some other projects like the opportunity to
study abroad and our integration in European society.
If you organize any kind of project in which Kosovo young people are included please let me know, I would be very happy to be part of them.

I hope I did not take your time,

Sincerely,
Kaltrina Morina
Pristine

Following the situation in Hungary, we have asked three youngsters with different political opinions to share their thoughts on the matter, hoping to have a better understanding of what’s happening.

Gergely, 29, pro-government, holds a MA in Economics and Political Sciences from Budapest Corvinus University

The Hungarian society has been severely damaged throughout the last 100 years and it is very much traumatizing. Let us think of the Treaty of Trianon/Versailles in 1919 which handed two-third of the country’s territory and ethnic Hungarian population to foreign countries. Hence, restoring the Hungarian citizenship for those minorities and stating in the new Constitution that the government feels responsible for them, might indeed interfere with European standards, but I feel it is a moral obligation to any Hungarian with some sense of consciousness.

Our seek for the restoration of former Hungary was corrupted, which lead us to be a vassal of Nazi Germany during WWII, which then lead us to the tragedy of the Holocaust. Afterwards came 40 years of Soviet occupation. These continuous vassal-ships make the Hungarian public hostile towards European policy makers, feeling that they are teaching us what is democratic and what is not. After the fall of communism, the Hungarian society was united in its unconditional will to join the European Union. Ever since, many of us see ourselves as a country colonized by Western European big money. So, when the Orbán government puts forward a crisis tax on utilities and financial institutions which affects mostly Western European companies, what do we see afterwards? Foreign governments and journalists, as well as the IMF/EU, threatening to apply sanctions, attacking our democratically-elected government, and teaching us what is democratic and what is not.

However, I believe the current government fails to understand and remedy the wounds of Hungarian left-wing society. Hence the steps taken to control the historically left-wing entities: media, jurisdiction, Central Bank, etc. The most important step would be to find the way of reconciliation and mutual understanding between the various groups of society. Personally, I feel that the government has its share of mistakes, and I believe it would be good if its supporters could also protest against those mistakes, regardless of the fact that we fairly elected it, and continue to stand by it.

Sarolta, 28, pro-changes, holds a MA in English and Hungarian Studies from Budapest ELTE-BTK University

To me, the current changes have a lot to do with our history. Indeed, these changes target the areas that typically involve historical roots and bear the imprint of the communist era in Hungary. It is reasonable then that our history, especially the year 1989 is to be taken into consideration when wanting to understand these new directions… It is a common knowledge, especially among the ’intellligentsia’ of the generation above, now in their 50s, 60s, that the change of regime was not complete in 1989 (former Communist politicians got to keep their positions in the government). Hence their support for Orban.

And, hence the dissatisfaction – was there really a change of regime after 1989? – which now seems to manifest in let’s call it, a renewing of the foundations and content of our state and statemanship: a new Constitution, which, I think is indeed necessary, as the former one was written under Communism. However, I believe it important to take into consideration the current opposition protests. As each and every protest, they are legitimate and inform us that these changes are not fully accepted. It can bring to the surface what people affected by laws (or principles) think and feel, and to what extent. The reaction of the government is also always very telling – how they communicate, interpret protests and what answers they give – or whether they want to give or just evade answering problems.

Finally, concerning the EU/IMF issue, I would like the government to choose an option that fits into the picture of both European and Hungarian economic well-being and thus I believe the government should take measures to ensure we head out from our current economic situation, and therefore should consider more seriously the deal with the EU/IMF.

Attila, 28, pro-opposition, holds a MA in Political Sciences from Université Catholique de Louvain, Belgium, now lives in Budapest

I believe the changes operated by the government do, indeed, have roots in our history, however it shouldn’t, and that’s the whole issue here. Many reasons have led to this situation. First, giving a 2/3 majority to a country – and to a political party – that has so little experience and maturity in democracy was a mistake. I believe this mistake allowed the Fidesz to consider itself legitimate and responsible to wipe out all remains of communism, and crossing limits. It is no surprise that the situation in Hungary is a unique case in Europe. Maybe we should ask ourselves why. Second, the 2/3 majority was led by two main causes: firstly because of the incapacity of the Socialist Party during the post-Communist era which contributed to a global loss of trust from the people of Hungary, and secondly because of the economic crisis, which amplified the desperate wish of the people to see a radical change happen.  Those two causes were the main factors for the rise of the Fidesz. With such a majority, it was obvious the Fidesz would feel legitimate to change a Constitution that had roots in the Communist era into a right-wing Constitution.

However, my opinion is the following: I think these changes are obsolete. Indeed, these are not modern ideas. These changes prove that the government is still fighting against its old communist demons, still lives in the nostalgia of glorious times when Hungary was a great empire, and plays on the nostalgia of the people, allowing itself to influence them. I believe the Fidesz, consciously or unconsciously, uses the tough modern history of Hungary to its advantage. Not only regarding the Communist era, but also regarding the periods of time where Hungary was invaded by the stranger: the Turkish, the Austrians, the Nazis, the Soviets. A huge sentiment of loneliness and isolation has grown in Hungary, increased by the continuous sentiment of failure for the fight for freedom (Trianon, loss of the two WWs, the 1956 revolution). Hence, the Fidesz wants to  make a clean cut from this difficult past, but instead keeps falling back into it.

All in all, these ideas have no place in the EU, especially as youngsters, the so-called “Erasmus generation”, have no origins in the Communist era. The government doesn’t understand that by having joined the EU, it can finally put the past behind and ground a whole new country and nation, using all the advantages the EU provides. It is time for Hungary to stop looking in the past and to start looking at the future, instead. A solution would be to open the wounds and talk about it, as the Germans did after Nazism. Although Communism delayed it, this solution would allow Hungary to finally move forward. Let’s hope then that democracy is still alive and this period be forgotten and the 2/3 majority mistake be learned.

« Cécile Viault holds a Master Degree in International Politics from the University of Warwick in the UK, and is a collaborator with ThinkYoung. »

18 months, that’s the time it took for the so-called centre-right – call it nationalist – Fidesz government to change a democratic and promising country into an authoritarian one, on the brink of bankruptcy. 359 new laws were passed in 18 months, whose main ones are considered to be unconstitutional. What did the EU do while Orbán was placing his pawns? Sadly nothing, at least not until late December, when it finally opened an eye and decided to take a deeper look at the matter. And by matter, I mean a dreadful resurgence of an authoritarian political party, that received a supermajority at the parliament through fair elections, and that has, since then, simply decided to change the Constitution so as to make sure its legacy will last long. But unfortunately, the reaction of the EU, along with the IMF, may already be too late.

On New Year’s Day, the new Constitution of the former Republic of Hungary (the Fidesz removed from the Constitution the denomination) was adopted, to the great displeasure of the Hungarian civil societies, political opposition parties, the EU along with the European Commission, the IMF, and the US.

So, in what does this Constitution consist of? No need to explain all the 359 laws that passed, but best is to resume the main points that changed and that will deeply affect the people living in Hungary.

The Central Bank Law: along with the creation of a third vice-president, the new law gives power to the government to name the vice-presidents. Hence, the Fidesz will now be able to place its pawns within the institution and thus control the president of the Central Bank. However, due to EU warnings, the Fidesz was forced to withdraw this law. Yet, it created an amendment that will affect the very status of the Central Bank: the Fidesz now has the legal power to merge the Central Bank with another institution so as to create a new agency, for which it will name its president. To sum up, the Central Bank is left with no power.

The Judiciary Law: concerning the Constitutional Court, the Fidesz has ensured to shut it down: the government has expanded the number of judges so as to fill the opening positions with pro-Fidesz partisans; it has also managed to give less power to the Court, especially regarding budget laws. Concerning ordinary judiciary, most judges have been dismissed due to lowering the retirement age, leaving space for new ones, named by the Fidesz. Hence, the government now controls the judiciary, too.

The Taxation Laws: among many, important is to highlight that the Fidesz has created a permanent flat tax of 16%, therefore taxing more the poor than the rich; moreover, it has put in the Constitution an “emergency tax”, that would be used to tax all citizens if the IMF or EU would come to fine Hungary because of its non-respect for European democratic rights.

The Media law: this law allows a new media board to be created, filled with pro-Fidesz members, and has the power to shut down media if there are not conformed to specific norms. Unsurprising coincidence, KlubRadio, the only independent radio station, then saw its license being taken away.

The Law on Religions: this new law cuts down the number of state-recognized religious groups from 300 to 14, thus suppressing subventions for the “non-chosen” ones. Moreover, the Constitution now recognizes Christianity as to be the savior of the nation.

Constitutional Changes Affecting Private Lives: the fetus is now considered to be a living human being, therefore automatically forbidding abortion; as to marriage, it must be between a man and a woman, thus closing eyes on gay rights.

Constitutional Changes Affecting Political Opposition: it is now stated in a proposed constitutional amendment that the former communist party is considered a criminal organization, and that the actual socialist party is the direct legal successor.

Constitutional Changes Affecting Elections: the Fidesz has managed to dismiss the politically-diverse Election Commission, and has replaced the commissioners with pro-Fidesz members, hence making all future elections imbalanced.

So now, what’s next for Hungary? On January 11th, the European Commission held an important meeting with Hungary, regarding the new set of laws and new Constitution. It gave Orbán a one-month delay to amend three laws that are considered to be unconstitutional and contrary to the EU guidelines that all member states have agreed to adopt and respect. If the Hungarian government refuses, the European Commission will be forced to take actions, including suspending the European funds that Hungary desperately needs for its budget.

The future months will hold great uncertainty in Hungary, and it is still unclear where this situation will lead to. Yet, we can be sure of one thing: it is the people of Hungary who will be the most affected if their country were to drastically fall.

« Cécile Viault holds a Master Degree in International Politics from the University of Warwick in the UK, and is a collaborator with ThinkYoung. »

Ana Maria Anghelescu is an 18 year-old Romanian high school student. Today, she sent a letter to ThinkYoung, hoping to make Europe aware of the protests being carried out in her country. She believes that even if the demonstrations are featured in the news, not enough people pay attention to the underlying motives of the rising up population. And she believes, too, that there is some common link between the protests in her country, and those being carried out in Spain, Hungary or Greece: people crave for change, and young people dare.

“In the streets for what we believe in…

Did it occur to you that while you were going about your routine week, in a little country in the south-east of EU, somebody is not happy with their situation? That somebody is protesting for change? That somebody is trying to make their opinion heard? That somebody is bearing the freezing cold outside just to show their need for something new, something different?

Can anyone blame them for going in the street and screaming out loud what is apparent to the whole country? It seems hard to ignore a protest of this kind and magnitude from Romania, but are you, an outsider, listening to what they say?

Maybe you didn’t hear about Romania, or maybe you did, but you never stopped and thought the protests’ motivations. But, let’s face it! I am quite sure it is not only the Romanian situation that you ignore. What about Greece? Portugal? Poland? No matter how much these countries are in the news, do you take your time to understand them? Those countries that are not as powerful as France or Germany are not able to develop without help, and cannot do anything without asking for advice… But they still exist!

Romania has the potential to be a powerful country, but the problem is that it doesn’t know how to become one. We complain, but most of the time we don’t do anything. We fear the consequences of showing what we think, but we are not afraid of the effects of our indolence. These days, though, this has started to change.

There are people that say this protest brought together more people than the 1989 revolution. There are people that say that most of the protesters are hooligans. There are people that say that some of the protesters don’t even know why they are there. The truth is they are somewhere in the middle, but the fact is that there are protests. And that they have been going on for more than 10 days now.

It all started with the health care reform and with the change of the emergency-response system. With the forced resignation of  the founder of Romania’s emergency services, Raed Arafat, things were always going to get worse. Imagine to see all your work, the hours you put in to make the country’s public services a better standard, taken away in an instant. How would you feel? Betrayed? Frustrated? Annoyed? But what about the moment when someone in a little town begins to protest for you? And, what if only one day later, the entire country is fueled by a revolutionary thought to support you?

Our government began to listen to the protesters, they began to fear the movement and the power of the people. Then, guess what? Arafat was called back and the health care reform was called off. Good! But, the fact is that people are still protesting. Their uprising is no longer about specific reforms, they’re there because they want bigger changes. They want to make their voices heard. The euro-crisis, the austerity measures, the Greek protests – all these are examples of issues that affect the way we live. We are sick and tired of bearing everything.

Bearing would not be a problem for the passive part of the population, but it is for the youth. Many teenagers in Romania disagree with the current situation and choose to study and live abroad. They leave everything behind, because they feel the situation back home is hopeless. But now, young voices say that we need to have our country led by competent people, that every party that is represented in the Parliament needs to have its voice heard and understood. Until today, the government has simply ignored the other parties and has promoted the laws ignoring the traditional democratic voting system. Indeed, some of the youngsters realized that they are not represented through these methods. They want a government and a Parliament that works for them and does not fight against each other.

The young Lieutenant, Alexandru Gheorghe came to Bucharest to protest against the injustice, against the fact human rights are not respected, against the indolence of the people. He admits to not represent the whole Romanian Army, just a group that chose him. Some people call him a hero, the next president, I’m not so sure, but I still respect him for being courageous enough to speak out against the problems which could ultimately lead him to lose his job.

Today’s protests are an example of how people should react when their leaders ignore them. They are an example of how young people dare state their opinion, proving that communication can improve it all. Gandhi said “Be the change you want to see in the world”, and that’s what the Romanian youth is doing right now.

The new threat to European identity

Four or five years ago, nearly every European Union official was looking to make national newspaper headlines. Today, the EU is a fixture on the front page — but not in a way we expected.

Four to five years ago too, the European Union was encouraging its citizens to pay attention to all the relevant EU issues, and to figure out a way to reduce the so-called democratic deficit. Today, people care – but not in the way we had hoped.

What has gone wrong?

In the past, the main threat to the development of European identity stemmed from the obstinacy of the so-called Eurosceptics. Europe, it seemed, was beloved by the so-called Europeanists — that is, everyone else. Those on the political right found that Europe’s newfound potential to have a consolidated market appealed to them; those on the left were moved by the idea of their fragmented continent evolving into some sort of internationalist dream. Perhaps most importantly, the EU was an idea that people on both the left and right could get behind because of the values it stood for: human rights, democracy, freedom, equality, and unity. While the institutions of the EU were still under construction, it was easy for all Europeanists from very different backgrounds and ideas to see the potential of Europe as their own potential.

Now that the building process is in an advanced stage, the ideas have begun to be implemented, leaving many of the previous Europeanists disappointed. In this case, the once-expected definition and materialization of Europe has resulted in a decrease of the people supporting it. While some may argue that the EU is an unfinished project, that there is still potential for everyone’s ideas, there is an increasing feeling among the disappointed Europeanists that the core values of the EU have been abandoned.

Examples of this crisis of confidence can be found all around the continent. Perhaps most obviously, consider Greece’s cancellation of the referendum on EU rescue aid for Greece. Had this referendum taken place, markets would have been shaken even before the world knew the outcome of the vote; if the Greeks had unequivocally rejected the referendum, the outcome may well have plunged Europe into economic chaos. Needless to say, it is understandable that the referendum was called off. But was this the correct course of action in the long run? Why do political leaders fear their people’s ability to take charge of their own future, instead of providing them the tools to do it? Is disrespecting the will of the people a healthy trend for democracy? Should the legitimacy of a people’s government and its decisions not be derived from the people themselves?

If financial stability trumped democratic legitimacy in Greece, speed and efficiency are what beat out democracy in Italy. The fact that the new Prime Minister was not backed by the people and was simply appointed by President Napolitano is hardly reassuring, and indeed a frightening trend. While there is no doubt he is a legitimate leader, the sense of urgency and need for a new head of state in Italy became more important than its democratic traditions.

In Spain, more disappointment abounds. One of the few EU member-state where a transition of power occurred completely democratically, the country had previously amended its Constitution to put a ceiling on public deficit. This measure was praised by experts, but also criticized by those who noted that only a national sense of urgency had incited the first-ever change to the rigid Spanish constitution. Whereas a referendum is traditionally desired to corroborate serious political change, the dire situation Spain found itself in was enough to get the amendment pushed through in about ten minutes.

The aforementioned examples indicate that the European Union may be slowly leaving behind the ideals that gave birth to the institution itself and increasing the democratic deficit. Ignoring the will of the citizenry is contrary to the core values of the EU; its tradition of pluralism is the main source of its strength. If the EU does not alter its trajectory, we may soon find that the EU has evolved into a kind of Illustrated Despotism, where “everything is done for the people, but without the people”.

Leire Ariz is the Media Officer at ThinkYoung

Alex Yamet contributed to this article

Learn more about ThinkYoung in our website, and follow us on facebook and Twitter!

With our eyes, ears and souls overwhelmingly focused on the socio-economic crisis and the struggle to fight it, we seem to have neglected the scope of a remarkable transformation that has affected Europe’s traditional political life. In the latter part of 2011, within a matter of weeks, critical political situations have been surprisingly unlocked, paving the way for fresh governments to take office in at least four important members of the EU: Greece, Italy, Spain and Belgium. Whereas the specific conditions of such renewal have differed from one place to another, one thing has certainly united the destinies of those nations: the “fatality” of change. Forget epic struggles of ideas, more or less sincere promises, forward-looking visions or new charismatic leaders; across a considerable part of Europe, political renewal has rather happened amidst emergency plans, hard announcements over future recipes and widespread frustration. Even in Spain, where the Partido Popular has gained the widest parliamentary majority in the country’s democratic history, the clear choice of citizens seems to have been driven more by popular discontent over the outgoing Socialist government than by wholehearted trust into Rajoy’s leadership. In the midst of the continent’s worst crisis since 1945, in sum, new rulers have taken office and original majorities taken form without joy, with the overarching imperative of revitalizing the patients as soon as possible.

That is certainly understandable given the alarming situation many European countries are going through, particularly in the South: high indebtedness, rising unemployment, closing of factories and a generalized lack of confidence. As three political and economic giants such as France, Russia and the United States head for fundamental election this year, however, we see no better wish for 2012 than the hope that those campaigns will mark a solid return to politics. Whereas the term “politics” needs to be interpreted in its widest sense, not just as the fight between this and that leader to get consensus, but as the capacity of painting new scenarios, indicating the way forward to a whole society, in a word building the future. That is indeed what really is missing in the West today, and what young generations need more desperately: a sketch of future, the chance to believe in a long-term perspective. In each of the big countries where citizens are going to vote this year, the new leaders will need to dedicate many efforts to fix problems at home. Yet they also bear a clear chance to redraw a path and a mission for their nations.. Elections, in other words, can and need to get back to what they were invented for: analyzing the state of play of a society, shape new concepts and values to innovate it, and install new leaders capable of anticipating changes, not just dealing with them. That is the essence of democracy, and that is the first and fundamental “raw material” that is needed to get Western societies back on track.

Simone Disegni is a Policy Analyst and a member of the Writing Team at ThinkYoung, the first think tank concerned about young Europeans.

Website: http://www.thinkyoung.eu/

Kosovo declared independence on February 17, 2008, joining the free world and becoming the world’s 193rd nation state. Its chosen path now is toward European integration, with a wish to become fully integrated into the Euro-Atlantic family of democracies.

(more…)

“Do you think that you are better, really better than the rest? Realize there is a problem, I know that you can give your best” shouted a popular German band fifteen years ago, in their best-selling rock song “Open Your Eyes, Open Your Mind”.

(more…)

Good afternoon! This is our first post in this blog. We will contribute with articles and reflections written by young people. We hope they would be helpful and interesting for you! Very soon you would find our first contribution. Check it out!