PRESENT ISSUES

15.02.2012
Eurobarometer: Europeans consider corruption a major
problem

According to the Eurobarometer survey published by the Commission almost three quarters of
Europeans continue to see corruption as a major problem, think it exists at all levels of
government and has increased in the last three years. Eight percent of respondents say that they
have been asked or expected to pay a bribe in the past year.

Whilst the nature and scope of corruption varies from one EU State to another, corruption harms
the EU as a whole. The economic costs incurred by corruption in the EU are estimated to amount
to around € 120 billion per year.

In June last year, the European Commission adopted an anti-corruption package calling for a
stronger focus on corruption in all relevant EU policies. It also established a specific EU monitoring
and assessment mechanism, an EU Anti-Corruption Report, which will give an account of the state
of play of anti-corruption efforts in all member countries. The first report is scheduled for 2013.

The Commission will soon propose further legislation, notably on the confiscation of criminals'
assets, the reform of public procurement rules, more advanced statistics on crime and an
enhanced anti-fraud policy at the European level.

Background

The Eurobarometer survey was carried out in the 27 EU Member States in September 2011. The key
findings are:

 The majority (74%) of Europeans believe that corruption is a major problem in their
country. Almost half of all Europeans (47%) think that the level of corruption in their country
has risen over the past three years.
 Most Europeans think corruption exists within local (76%), regional (75%) and
national (79%) institutions.
 Europeans believe that bribery and the abuse of positions of power takes place in all
areas of public service. National politicians (57%), and officials awarding public tenders (47%)
are the most likely to be considered involved in such activities.
 40% of Europeans believe that a too close relationship between business and politics
contributes to corruption. Lack of action by politicians (36%) and a lack of transparency in the
 way in which public money is spent (33%) are contributing factors. The majority (68%) do not
think that there is sufficient transparency and supervision of the financing of political parties.
 The majority of Europeans (70%) think that corruption is unavoidable and that it has
always existed. Two in three Europeans (67%) believe that corruption is part of their country’s
business culture.
 The majority of Europeans (67%) disagree that they are personally affected by
corruption in their daily lives. Only a minority (29%) say they are personally affected. An even
smaller proportion (8%) have been asked or expected to pay a bribe in the past year.
 Faced with a corruption case, Europeans are most likely to trust the police (42%) and
the judicial system (41%) and least likely to trust political representatives (6%) to help them

WESTERN EUROPE (BACKGROUND LANG TO)

Western Europe – is part of Europe, which geographically includes the territory of France,
Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Great Britain and Ireland. During the Cold War under
Western Europe understood the capitalist countries of Europe, which opposed the socialist
countries of Eastern Europe. Today it is often used for the member countries of the European
Union and NATO.
List of countries in Western Europe:
France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Great Britain and Ireland, Spain, Portugal
Historically, Western Europe is the core of Western civilization. Its main difference is the rule in
the religious sphere of Catholicism and Protestantism, the existence of pluralist democracy in
the political sphere, as well as the development of civil society in a natural way.

Eastern Europe is a region that encompasses many different cultures, ethnicities,

languages, and histories. Grouping all of these countries under a single designation can
sometimes be problematic; experts, scholars, and those living there label parts of the region
according to varying sets of criteria, and heated debates have been known to erupt when
one party has felt that a certain country has been mis-categorized. However, it's important
to note that the countries broadly classified as being a part of Eastern Europe have one
thing in common: they were all behind the Iron Curtain before its fall, and this political
boundary of the last century helps us define a region whose development, especially until
the 1990s, has been very different from that of Western Europe.

The most widely recognizes sub-regions of Eastern Europe include:

 East Central Europe

 The Baltics
 Southeastern Europe/Balkans
 Eastern Europe

The countries within these regions are as follows:

 Russia
 Czech Republic
 Poland
 Hungary
 Romania and Moldova
 Croatia
 Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia
 Slovenia
 Slovakia
 Bulgaria
 Ukraine and Belarus
 Serbia
 Montenegro, Bosnia and Herzegovina
 Albania, Kosovo, and Macedonia

The East-West Divide in Europe: Does it Exist?

The shortest answer to the question posed by the title is, yes, it does. But this
answer is only partially true. A truer answer, but still only partially true, is that it
does and does not. And the real answer is, I think, that it does exist but is only
one among the many dividing lines that criss-cross Europe and it may not be the
most important one—or at least its importance is rapidly decreasing. I emphasize
this point because the reality or myth of the East-West divide has become part of
the political game in Europe. It has become an argument against integration on
both sides of the continent. Conservatives in the West repeat: “they are so
different,” while conservatives in the East echo: “we are so different

The East-West divide

Let me first clearly state that I am addressing the East-West Divide, not in Europe as a
whole, but only within the EU and the countries that are due to accede early next year.
The EU gives credence to the short answer, that yes, there are undoubtedly fields in
which there will be significant differences between the western and eastern halves of
Europe even after enlargement. Let me mention some of these fields in order of
importance
The greatest gap between East and West exists in the socio-economic sphere.
East Central European countries are plagued by the lack of a social contract, by
unacceptably high social inequalities, low social security, strong social disintegration,
rampant, egotistic individualism and extensive destitution and poverty. There has been
very little progress in addressing these problems since the chaotic early 1990s.

There still is a yawning gulf between East and West in the field of
environmental pollution as well. In recent years, environmental rehabilitation has
gathered momentum in the EU candidate countries, and the environmentalist
mentality has been strengthened. But the problems to be solved are still
intimidatingly great

As far as economic efficiency and production are concerned, candidate

countries have made remarkable progress in the past 14 years, but experts and
statistics are still inconclusive about how far these efforts have narrowed the gap
between western and eastern economies. The differences in GDP per capita,
productivity, economic output, capitalization, savings, integration into European
and global networks, business skills and routines are still huge.

Much remains to be done in the field of political culture. People in the East are
still characterized as having less personal autonomy, less responsibility as citizens and
members of a global community, and they are more passive politically than their
counterparts in the West. In some of these countries people struggle with seriously
disturbed national and social identities.

As far as political institutions are concerned, differences have almost

disappeared between East and West. All candidate countries are now more or less well-
functioning parliamentary democracies. It is true, though, that East Europe must still do
a lot in terms of accountability, transparency, checks and balances, the rule of law and
access to power and information—though some of the western countries are hardly
models to emulate.
 The real success has been achieved by candidate countries in adopting an
institutionalized system to support a market economy. In this field they have gone
through a fundamental learning and reform process, with some countries not that far
behind certain West European countries. Finally, there are no significant differences in
culture or lifestyle. In certain fields (literacy, education, the importance of literature and
art), some of the eastern countries may score higher than certain countries in the West.

Complex patterns: historical

Historically, the East-West divide in Europe was not so clear-cut, stable or simple
as it appears at present. There were many cross-cutting influences that have
divided Europe for centuries and which do not—or only partially—overlap with
the present East-West divide. In other words, Europe and European civilization is
the product of three millennia of economic, political, social, cultural, climatologic
and other changes, which have left their imprints on various parts of the
continent.

Christianity, for instance, first spread over parts of the Balkans, and—in a
different version—on the Italian peninsula and in faraway Ireland. Then it started to
invade the Western part of Europe, could not conquer parts of Islamic Iberia for
centuries, reached the great plains of East Central Europe in the tenth and eleventh
centuries, and left untouched parts of northern and eastern Europe for a while longer.
Feudalism, in its fullest form, developed and flourished in the western and central
part of Europe, it developed different and weaker structures in the Mediterranean basin,
in East Central Europe, and hardly touched the northern belt of the continent.
Urbanization had a dominant impact first in the Mediterranean. It reached the coastlines
of the Atlantic Ocean, the North and Baltic seas and the shores of a couple of great
European rivers a millennium later. It emerged as a string of splendid royal and princely
cities and rich burgher cities in East Central Europe at about the same time, leaving
large parts of Europe rural for several more centuries. Beginning in Italy, the
Renaissance (and later the Baroque) conquered the western and central part of Europe,
reached Austria, Dalmatia, Croatia, Hungary and Poland but did not penetrate large
parts of northern and eastern Europe or the Balkans.
The reformation left its fundamental imprint on western, northern and parts of
central Europe but did not even touch the Mediterranean basin and could not spill over
the Carpathian Mountains or reach the East European plains. The enlightenment
radiated out of Paris and London, reached communities as far north as Königsberg or
St. Petersburg, but could hardly penetrate Italy or Spain and—except for some shining
islands of enlightened reason at universities and in cities—left the center of Europe
dominated by the Hapsburg empire, and Eastern and South Eastern Europe more or
less in darkness. But the capital of this ‘dark empire’ was, at the same time, one of the
most important centers of the highest achievements of music. Later, countries lagging
behind in the process of industrialization and modernization, such as Poland and
Russia, rose among the most important centers of the Romantic revolution and Modern
vanguard art.
The great waves of industrialization, modernization and democratization rolled
from western and central Europe towards the southern, northern and eastern parts of
the continent but as far as democracy is concerned, the western, central and southern
regions of Europe lagged behind the democratic institutions of England or the everyday,
grassroots democracy of some of the Scandinavian countries. The same is true of the
social welfare institutions of the latter countries, and of late nineteenth century
Germany.

The impact of negative, destructive factors was also uneven in the course of
European history. The Hundred Years war, the great epidemics and the Thirty Years
War destroyed some of the most developed western and central parts of Europe and
caused less damage in other areas of central and southern Europe. Development was
slowed down, even halted, for centuries by Islamic rule in Spain and by the Mongol
invasions and the Turkish and the Russian occupations in eastern and southeastern
Europe.

Imperial power and ‘grandeur’ shaped the mentality of people in Spain, Portugal,
Britain, France, the Netherlands, Sweden and Soviet Russia, while imperial domination
crippled countries and people in the Hapsburg, the Ottoman and the Russian empires.
All in all, we may state that looking at Europe from a historical perspective, we see a
mosaic-like pattern and a maze of criss-crossing dividing lines instead of the simple
East-West divide about which we have spoken thus far. And this continues to be true of
contemporary Europe.

Complex patterns: now

Europe has a rich texture of social, political, economic and cultural entities. The
dividing lines criss-cross all over the continent. Let me mention a few of these
entities that overlap with one another in a complex pattern:
 ‘Old’ and ‘new’ EU member states
The Euro-zone and the rest
The core EU countries and the rest
The London—Madrid—Poland triangle
The Mediterranean countries
Big and small countries
Rich and poor countries
The “federalists” and the “confederationists”
NATO members and non-members
Spheres of influence (German, French, British, Italian, Spanish)
Common interests (agriculture, etc.)
Regional interests
Catholic, Protestant, and mixed countries
Countries with high or low (Islamic) immigrant populations

Ad hoc alliances

Cohesive forces

Yes, for a certain period of time, there will be important differences between the western
and eastern parts of the enlarged Union. But the forces of cohesion will, in all likelihood,
be much stronger. Let me mention a few. We have common (or parallel) pasts, common
memories, common victories and defeats, cooperation and conflicts. And beyond this,
we could say, with Heidegger or Baudrillard, that our worlds (our economic and political
models, technologies, ways of life, life strategies, music, sports, our visible worlds,
images, myths, gods, symbols) speak the same language. We live in the same world of
objects (cars, refrigerators, detergents, television sets, etc.) and in the same everyday
civilization (hygiene, shopping, forms of civility, schools, etc.).

Europe also shares common problems, which the EU will have to solve in the
coming years and decades. The only chance for people in the eastern and western
parts of the Union to solve these problems will be by working together on their solutions.
These problems include social and political problems, such as increasing the economic
efficiency of the welfare state and social justice. Political problems are also critical, such
as balancing freedom and equality, and finding an optimal combination of the various
models of democracy (parliamentary and presidential, majoritarian and pluralist, indirect
and direct, liberal and republican, modern and postmodern or interactive, etc.). Europe
also faces the challenge of becoming one of the major centers of the world in terms of
radiating new ideas, protecting human values, making new discoveries, developing new
technologies and launching new movements.

Clash of civilizations?
Those who use the concept of the East-West divide in their rhetoric and political
strategies, are inclined to speak of a clash of two incompatible civilizations. I think that
they are hopelessly wrong. Or more precisely, they are right when they speak of a clash
of civilizations. But they are wrong when they think that this clash is taking place
between the two parts of Europe. No, this conflict takes place within Europe, at the very
heart of European civilization. It is the dramatic clash of traditional western civilization
and our contemporary consumer civilization, which has triumphantly emerged in the last
half a century or so.
Our basic views about the world and the role of human beings in it, our goals and
strategies, our fundamental norms of conduct have radically changed. To show the
extent and extreme character of this change let me juxtapose a few norms of conduct:
in the left column there are the traditional principles, according to which our
grandparents tried to live, and in the right column those which we are prompted to follow
in the contemporary world. (See inset.)

Traditional Principles: New Principles:

Love thy neighbor! Love yourself!

Sacrifice yourself! Actualize yourself!
Discipline yourself! Enjoy yourself!
You are guilty, repent! You are innocent!
Save, be thrifty! Consume!
Live with scarcity! Live with abundance!
Obey! Conform! Be autonomous!
Be modest! Be free!
Punish yourself! Spoil yourself!
Do your duty! Fight for your rights!
Be careful! Take a risk!

This may be a deeper divide and may become a source of more conflict than the
East-West divide to which politicians so often refer. And the situation is even more
complex and chaotic since we live in the crossfire of a number of contradictory value
systems and visions of the world, such as religious-based values, modern individualism,
secular humanism, Victorian conservatism, hedonistic consumerism, postmodern
ambiguity and stoicism or the New Age type of transcendentalism and occultism. Well,
of course, it is not the responsibility of the EU or its bureaucrats to deal with the
problems of this great cultural, moral and spiritual transformation. But these are
problems that people run into every day and in this respect there is no difference
whatsoever between people living in the member countries or candidate countries of the
European Union. And they can solve these problems only together.

Reinventing Europe
The candidate countries in East Central Europe—as well as the Balkans—need to
reinvent themselves. They have to find something in which they can excel, they have to
find their place in Europe and in the world. And, in a different way, this is also true of the
EU. This will be a difficult and long process, but working on the solution of common
problems is the best way to overcome traditional differences and bridge traditional
divides. Will they succeed? They certainly will if they listen to an old and wise saying:
Nothing is easier than success. You must simply do, in the right time and in the right
place, the right thing.