To Reinhard Hesse from a fellow countryman

Dear Mr. Hesse,

Maybe my studies here in Britain have changed my attitude, so that I have become more troubled by many questions I try to understand as a pedantic and idealistic German.... – yet frankly I won't be following your example with nice phrases about the mentalities of Europeans. In my view, there is more we can build on than just an eclectic collection of cultural peculiarities and vague conceptions (or prejudices) about each other’s culture. So “where the hell is ‘Europe’?”

I think that it is rather misguided to look at the examples of the admittedly rather inconsistent foreign policy of the EU. This displays precisely the kind of detached style of talking about politics in terms of geopolitical constellations and strategic interests which we like to accuse Americans of.

True, you acknowledge yourself that Europe’s problem is not the lack of a single telephone number. The European project has been an answer to vast problems of internal peace and security.

But it is a doomed project to appeal to these historic achievements in order to create the required emotional “commitment” to the European project, and to the idea of enlargement in particular. Personally I am very much in favour of enlargement, for reasons of peace and security (and others such as real economic opportunities for all participants, including the ‘rich’ countries like Germany). I fear, however, that – as controversial as this might sound in a forum for “Open Democracy” – this decision will have to be taken rather autocratically by the political elites who sometimes have a better perspective on the long term implications of such geopolitical and historical decisions.

On the other hand, there is the broader and more vague issue of the legitimacy and destination of the European project: this is an issue that definitely cannot be decided at the top, as the elites and decision makers can only derive their limited and necessary freedom of action from a fundamental consensus on the ground.

I am not going to offer you a miraculous solution through the European values we all share. Shared history and culture is usually a fairly artificial product of the political will for unity, as the creation of our nation states exemplifies. I acknowledge that there are indeed severe problems of cultural integration and questions of language that cannot be overcome easily. However, it is also fair to point to such a temporary convergence of national public discourses in Europe,as occurred over the BSE crisis, fuel prices and the protests in Nice. (Also note that a common consciousness does not have to originate in agreement; conflict can be equally integrative in creating a community of people who solve their disputes in common political processes.) Either way, such a process towards understanding takes time; and it is usually brought about by a shared desire to form a community.  

In order to create this desire, this passion for Europe, something other than foreign policy and cultural homogeneity is needed. Is it an “idea of European life” as you put it?

Yes, but maybe in a different sense than you seem to understand it. It is not about some fuzzy life style we may “charm” other people with. It is more about meeting challenges all modern states and societies face, not just through the infamous effects of “globalisation”. We are all deeply disenchanted with the project of the democratic welfare state that has come under attack from a number of angles: ageing populations, “globalisation”, the ecological effects of constantly required economic growth, new demands of direct participation of citizens, social disintegration and political de-alignment, etc.

To kindle interest in the European project, the real potential lies in giving fresh answers to such challenges. And maybe better answers, not just through greater political power, as the advocates of the “superstate” proclaim, but also through the exchange of and competition between different ideas and models of how we should organise our lives and societies.

The European Union opens up many opportunities to tackle these challenges – without replacing struggles at the local or the national level to devise and realise new solutions, or becoming an escape route for delegating responsibility. If we can instil this sense of the EU as a new pathway to arrive at solutions, we will eventually be able to put our confidence in the natural growth of a community from the grass root level.

This vision requires patience and a lot of idealism. Lots of concrete issues at hand need our attention and efforts to generate a productive debate. Yet I would like to appeal to all participants not to forget about the (intimidating) question of the transcendent direction of integration, which definitely must be more substantial than fancy common cultural values. So I would like to conclude with a question which hopefully summarises this intent and reminds us of the normative dimension of politics: Is Europe our last utopia?