Turbulent times ahead: citizens need shelter from the storm. America on one side and Russia on the other side are following their own agenda and interests.

 

- Should Europe play a stronger role in the world and speak with one voice on peace and security?

- What should be our purpose: act as a selfish giant - or reaching out people in need?

Share your idea

Please try to be as concrete as possible when answering the questions, the more in depth you go the more impactful your ideas will be!

Comments

The European Union is currently dealing with a regional problem, the migrant crisis, on their home turf. While the migrant crisis is a global phenomena, it has regional roots in war, famine and poverty. Rather than dealing with the large global phenomena as a series of regional ones, the EU is doing nothing but waiting for the problem to come, quite literally, knocking on our door. And the waves of migrants have forced Europe on its knees and are taking a lot of her resources to handle them. The thing is, we aren't seeing even the worst of it. As I said, the problem is regional, so the worst effects are understandably, on the region. For the uninitiated, if you think the treatment and conditions of migrants are bad here, it's nothing compared to what it is down there. Some of the refugee camps are humanitarian disasters on the scale of the concentration camps, with limited access to food and water and hardly any rights to talk off. The agency responsible for these people is the United Nations Human Rights Council, which not only has a budget wholly incapable of dealing with a problem of this size, the budget isn't even fully funded! Imagine being told that you'll have to feed a thousand people with a budget able to cover only 500 and then finding out that you only received enough money for a hundred. That's the UNHRC ar the moment. I see two options, though more might exist. The EU steps up and the Member states collectively start administrating these camps, maybe alongside the UN, maybe on their own, while negotiating better conditions and rights for these people in their current country of residence. If that sounds like too much, the EU could at least do something about the funding of the UNHRC.

Votes: 6

I believe that, in these times where Russia is becoming more aggressive and the US puts doubts on our mutual defence treaties, the EU needs to finally integrate our defence policy. PESCO is a great start but I have 3 more proposals that are more acceptable than a single "EU army" but also guarantee our independence and ensure a sort of "double down" on NATO. Foreign intervention should be strictly limited to cases where our allies and friendly countries’ sovereignty is being directly threatened by a foreign force or a foreign funded fifth column. 1) My main proposal is a standardisation of European armies. In Europe, we have a lot of military excellency, some EU countries do the best military equipment in their category, particularly when thinking for example about Germany’s Leopard 2 tank (and it’s variants), or Beretta’s 9mm pistol. Ensuring every nation uses the same kind of military equipment has a double advantage. On the one side, using only the best kind of equipment any EU country has to offer allows us to profit from the excellency present in the EU, but it also allows EU countries to work as a more coherent force in the event of an attack. How do we preserve local national industries? Every time the EU’s armies need new equipment, a commission of generals would convene and chose among the prototypes offered, just like in national cases, the particularity here is that the winner would have the obligation to pass on the license to all other EU weapons manufacturers in exchange for a large payment from the EU itself. This would allow national industries to be preserved, but would also make competition much higher, since every time a new design is accepted, the technological level is “reset” across the Union, allowing our armies to benefit from the best technology available. 2) My second proposal is much simpler, the EU should include a mutual defence treaty guaranteeing that an attack against any member is seen as an attack against all, but excluding participation in an offensive war, this would ensure a secondary protection if NATO fails and diminish the possibility that the EU is branded as an offensive imperialistic power. 3) My last proposal is to have a united general staff of commanders meeting every year to review defensive plans for any occasion. Short of organising periodic exercises, planning is the very minimum to guarantee we are ready for an potential attack, however unlikely it may be, it would be a huge mistake to dismiss outright such a devastating event.

Votes: 9

Stop the giants América And Rusia. For our protection. I would like to be that voice on peace and security I studied international human rights, environmental sciences And renewable energíes,And 4 languages...italian, portugues,english,And spanish. I should work for the parlamento Do you want my CV? How can i be there?
Vote up!

Votes: 11

You voted ‘up’

Europe should speak with one voice, but Europe should avoid a “Pax Europa” situation where Europe imposes peace through force of arms, this sort of world policing doesn’t work in reality and often leads ti more trouble. Europe’s main international form of pressure and conduct needs to be soft power

Votes: 50

I do not believe one voice can achieve peace because one voice alone is resemblance to just shouting at a brick wall. I believe everyone should unite and voice their will and want for peace. The more voice who fight for peace the more likely it is for it to be achieved. It is my belief that in life the resilience few should help the less resilent many and build them up so they too can be resilient as well then go out and help another to be resilient. That is my belief and in order to do that we certainly need to reach out to those in need and help them on their feet. There also needs to be an intervention in regards to human traffick. There needs to be a removal of all corrupt leaders (who also condone human trafficking in countries like Africa etc.). It is inhumane to just sit back and watch others suffer. We have a duty as fellow human beings to help our fellow man.

Votes: 56

I may sound hawkish, but the I think the solution is one: More foreign interventionism. Europe needs to increase its military spending and greatly expand its military capabilities and be ready to act in different ways to achieve global justice, security and peace. Terrorism and rogue regimes usually appear in weakened, poverty-stricken countries. Therefore, a form of "proletarian" internationalism, where 1) Europe sends humanitarian aid to poor people in devasted countries in order to improve their lives and help these people to develop and escape their misery, is absolutely necessery and 2) Europe has the responsibility to help spread democracy and humanistic liberal principals across the globe, so it is necessery for Europe to intervent on a state's political system, rid it of corruption and try to remove authoritarian leaders, by non-violently supporting and funding democratic parties/factions/organisations in that country. However, when non-violent intervention doesnt succeed in spreading democracy and peace, and, given that the threat of aggression from rogue states and non-state actors will always be present, Europe has to be ready to enter preemptive wars, in order to help depose authoritarian regimes, establish democracy, liberate subjugated people and rid this world from oppression. Preventive wars can also be an option, to help disarm states that in the past had been a threat to global peace, are hostile towards Europe and the principals that it stands for, and it in the furute can potentially become a threat again.

Votes: 98

Europe should try to speak as one in external geopolitical matters. This voice should be result of needs of all countries. It should not be alone, should seek allies outside Union, one who are sane and fallow human rights. Power of voice depends on power of lungs, so EU should try to expand producation inside andunite new members if avaiable. United Army is good way to not waste public funds on duplicate, but we dont need to outspend USA. Conventional armforce is not everything. Cyberthreat is one thing. The other is losing integrity. There is a risk of growing inequality, or periferal regions of UE losing on integration. There is challenge in boosting economy of peryferals UE to keep unity. People will not fight for corporate overlords, but for humanity and future maybe. EU should also think of solving global crisis without arms. Ecological catasphrophe, poverty and lack of perspective could push Africa or Asia into dictatorship and war. Europe should be smart giant, which often involves creating allies. For Europe goal is not to conquest enemy but turn it into human rights democracy. Dicators die, nations remain.

Votes: 86