debating the borders of europ1

8/9/2019 Debating the Borders of Europ1

1/23

Debating the borders of Europe International Herald Tribune; 5/21/2004; Thierry de Montbrial

ear!h for "ore infor"ation on High#ea" $esear!h for russian geopoliti!s%

International Herald Tribune

05&21&2004

'ith ele!tions to the European (arlia"ent fast approa!hing) the publi! debate) parti!ularly in *ran!e) hastended to fo!us on Tur+ey,s !andida!y to -oin the European .nion% There "ay be "ore pressing issues) butthis !on!entration on Tur+ey refle!ts an iety about the ery pro!ess of European integration) and thedefinition of Europe% *ro" a geologi!al ie point) Europe is not a !ontinent% The ay e ha e arrangedthe di ision of Europe and sia does not follo physi!al geography) but geopoliti!s% If the .ral "ountainsare seen as a ,,natural,, di ision) it is be!ause the bul+ of the $ussian population is 3hristian) and lies estof these "ountains% ssigning Istanbul to Europe and estern natolia to sia is a ay of re"inding usthat #y antiu") rena"ed 3onstantinople) used to be a !apital !ity of 3hristianity% In that sense) the fall of3onstantinople in 145 !an still be felt so"e 450 years after the e ent% Many of the intelle!tuals arguingagainst the Tur+ish !andida!y still dra a "ap of Europe hi!h essentially !oin!ides ith the Middle ge!on!ept of the 3hristian orld% The essen!e of geopoliti!s is that ideology) hi!h in!ludes the ay oneloo+s at history) also shapes the "ap% The real 6uestion for the European .nion) therefore) is hat is itsunderlying ideology7 The ans er is not si"ple) sin!e the ideology has !hanged tre"endously sin!e the!ollapse of the o iet .nion and) en en before) ith the first enlarge"ents pf the 8European 3o""unity8to in!lude su!h !ountries as #ritain and 9ree!e% :e ertheless) it see"s to "e that the follo ing +ey ordsen!apsulate the !urrent ideology of the E. re!on!iliation) de"o!ra!y) rule of la ) hu"an rights and the

prote!tion of "inorities) se!ularis") "ar+et e!ono"y) se!urity and solidarity% 'hat e ant to a!hie e inEurope is a ne +ind of politi!al unit) hose identity is based on these !on!epts% *ren!h&9er"anre!on!iliation) for e a"ple by no "eans ob ious after 'orld 'ar II is no ta+en for granted% To loo+

positi ely at the Tur+ish !andida!y) therefore) is to share the grand ision of a re!on!iliation bet een thethree "onotheisti! religions through se!ularis"% Many in the Musli" orld) parti!ularly in rab !ountries)

loo+ at Euro&Tur+ish relations ith this in "ind% asso!iation treaty) the 1=== Helsin+iEuropean 3oun!il de!ision to re!ogni e Tur+ey as a !andidate and the E. de!ision in 2002 that "ade theopening of negotiations !onditional on Tur+ey,s fulfill"ent of the 1== 3openhagen politi!al !riteria)

hi!h are related to so"e of the !on!epts abo e%These !o""it"ents set the follo ing ti"etable In lateepte"ber or early ?!tober) the European 3o""ission ill issue a report assessing Tur+ey,s fulfill"ent of

these !riteria% #ased on this report) the European 3oun!il ill de!ide if and hen negotiations are to!o""en!e% If the Tur+s per!ei e the report to be unfair) failing in parti!ular to re!ogni e n+ara,s effortsregarding 3yprus) there !ould be a "a-or politi!al !risis in Tur+ey% It is i"portant to re"e"ber thata!!ording to publi! opinion polls) three 6uarters of the Tur+ish population a!!ept the refor"s de"anded bythe !o""ission) but a "a-ority of these belie e that hate er they a!!o"plish) European leaders ill find a

prete t to say no% If) on the !ontrary) a date is set to start the negotiations) it should be !lear to e erybody) both in the European .nion and in Tur+ey) that the negotiations ill ta+e a lot of ti"e and ill ha e to bee tre"ely detailed% t the end of the day) ere an adhesion treaty to be signed it ould stand no !han!e of

being unani"ously ratified unless all shado s ha e been s ept a ay% Moreo er) the diffi!ulty of gettingunani"ity for the ad"ission of a ne "e"ber in!reases ith the nu"ber of e isting ones% t so"e point)further enlarge"ent !ould be!o"e pra!ti!ally i"possible% $ather than so"e abstra!t geographi!al or!ultural notions) the ratifi!ation pro!ess ould then be!o"e the de fa!to "e!hanis" for setting the

boundaries of Europe% European integration is a long&ter" pro!ess) hose ,,soft po er,, has alreadyde"onstrated a re"ar+able itality% The !ollapse of the o iet .nion for!ed us to "o e ahead at e !essi espeed) putting the hole !onstru!tion at ris+% Hen!e the ertigo o er Tur+ey) a !ountry "ore populous than


2/23

9er"any) and one hi!h "ost Europeans are not yet !ulturally prepared to regard as ,,one of the"%,, 'eneed ti"e to ad-ust% #ut surrendering to e"otions ne t fall) hen the ti"e !o"es to fulfill our!o""it"ents) and refusing to start negotiations e en if the !onditions e set oursel es are "et) ould be afatal "ista+e%@@Thierry de Montbrial is the founder and president of the (aris&based *ren!h Institute ofInternational $elations AIfriB%C:ot to be reprodu!ed ithout the per"ission of the author%

2004 3opyright International Herald Tribune% http // %iht%!o"

2%The philosophy of 8Europe%8 The :ational Interest; /22/1==5; Faughland) Gohn

ear!h for "ore infor"ation on High#ea" $esear!h for russian geopoliti!s%

European go ern"ents ill only lead the region to destru!tion if they support the destabili ation ofEuropean nationalis" and its !ontrol by supranational organi ations% (oliti!al representati es ha e been

publi!ly oi!ing their !onte"pt for the rule of la and the philosophi!al foundations of de"o!ra!y%#alan!e of po er re"ains the best option for ensuring that pea!e and respe!t for the la are "aintainedthroughout Europe%

8The rational organi ation) at the global le el) of hu"an e isten!e%%%is !learly an absolute ne!essity%8

& Eduard he ardnad e) 1==2

There are "o"ents hen the s irling "ists in hi!h "odern European politi!al spee!h see"s deliberatelyto en elop itself are dissipated by sudden) perhaps unintended) flashes of linguisti! !larity% T o re"ar+s"ade in 1==4 ha e illu"inated) if only in silhouette) the broad outlines of !urrent European geopoliti!s and

politi!al !ulture%

The first !a"e in May) hen #oris


3/23


4/23

Indeed) pea!e is not the absen!e of antagonis" or !onfli!t) but the absen!e of ar% This fa!t underlines theessential differen!e bet een politi!s and ar it ould !learly be !ontrary to the essen!e of politi!s as su!hto ant to suppress one,s ene"ies) or to dissipate the distin!tion bet een friend and ene"y into obs!urity%This is pre!isely be!ause politi!s li es off en"ity) the opposition bet een parties and interests andideologies) the antagonis" bet een different opinions) alues and goals) as ell as the di ergen!e bet eendifferent solutions hi!h are proposed in order to attain the !o""on good% In a European !ontinent here8!onsensus)8 8!ooperation)8 8stability)8 and 8negotiation8 are idely pro!lai"ed as the !ardinal irtuesA"ost notably by the #ritish foreign se!retary) Douglas Hurd) ho often see"s to belie e that diplo"ati!negotiation is a good thing e en if it does not produ!e any results) as in


5/23

*irst) this interest in "inorities is ger"ane to $ussia% The !ollapse of the o iet .nion has been follo ed by the !reation) not only of the 3o""on ealth of Independent tates and a foru" for e!ono"i!8!ooperation8 bet een its 8"e"ber states)8 but also by the rallying to the 3I of initially re!al!itrant statesli+e Moldo a) on the prete t that the $ussian "inorities there need prote!ting% i"ilar influen!e has beene erted o er the #alti! states) espe!ially Estonia% "eri!ans ho are preo!!upied ith the rising proble"of 8group rights)8 hi!h see"s to be under"ining their o n !onstitution) ill re!ogni e the de -ure!lassifi!ation of indi iduals into ethni! groups as an instru"ent of state !ontrol and so!ial "anage"ent)

be!ause groups are "ore easy to !ontrol and to spea+ for than indi iduals%

e!ond) it is a !onse6uen!e of the 3 3E,s uni6ue !o"bination of internal and e ternal !o"peten!ies that)hate er the out!o"e of the legal debate on the pre!ise status of the Helsin+i *inal !t and the asso!iated

do!u"ents) the 3 3E in total is 8the sour!e of an o erar!hing European !onstitutional order hi!h sets thestandards to hi!h all national legal and politi!al institutions in Europe "ust !onfor"%8A2B

Therefore) far fro" being a defense allian!e li+e : T?) hi!h is dire!ted against a potential outsideaggressor and intended to preser e the internal integrity and pea!e of the signatory states) the 3 3E,s

pretense that it !an pa!ify the hole ga"ut of politi!al antagonis" fro" or+ers, rights to national"inority 6uestions & itself a "ista+en ai") as anyone ho has digested the abo e argu"ent about the natureof politi!s ill see & ris+s "a+ing it "ore li+e a trans!ontinental "ilitary poli!e for!e% The use of 3 3E8pea!e+eeping for!es8 is one ay in hi!h it proposes to do this) and a pre!edent as set in De!e"ber

hen su!h a for!e as dispat!hed to erbai-an% "o"ent,s thought should suffi!e to reali e the enor"ityof this i"agine : T? troops being !alled in to i"pose a "ilitary solution to a disturban!e & or e en to

pree"pt a potential one & ithin a : T? "e"ber state% Indeed) su!h prin!iples) hi!h attribute the highestalue to stability) "ight e en legiti"ate the use of a national ar"y against its o n !iti ens) as in 3he!hnya%

In !ase any of these fears see" e aggerated) it should not be forgotten that three of the +ey ar!hite!ts of theMaastri!ht Treaty on European .nion) *ran!ois Mitterrand) Ga!6ues Delors and Gohn Ma-or) ha e all "adee traordinary re"ar+s about the pri"a!y of stability o er de"o!ra!y% The t o *ren!h"en initially

el!o"ed the Mos!o puts!h in 1==1) Delors saying that it !ould ha e 8positi e aspe!ts%8 Indeed) he e ende!lared to the European parlia"ent -ust after it o!!urred that) 8'e !annot unite the states of 'esternEurope and at the sa"e ti"e en!ourage the brea+a ay of o iet $epubli!s)8 by hi!h he presu"ably"eant that the European .nion and the o iet .nion ere si"ilar institutions% The pro& erb poli!y ofFondon and (aris is si"ilarly predi!ated on a preferen!e for large politi!al entities o er the botherso"e

"ultipli!ity of s"all nations% :o politi!ian has gi en !learer e pression to this than Gohn Ma-or) hode!lared in 1== that) 8The biggest single ele"ent behind hat has happened in #osnia is the !ollapse ofthe o iet .nion and of the dis!ipline that e erted o er the an!ient hatreds in the old


6/23

!onferen!e in #udapest in De!e"ber failed e en to "ention the


7/23

de elop"ent and apparent gro th) dra s on "any of the sa"e un el!o"e prin!iples% Fi+e the 3 3E) forinstan!e) the Maastri!ht Treaty is full of 8"e!hanis"s8 to enable go ern"ents to de!ide this or that)espe!ially in the do"ains of foreign and defense poli!y) as if de!ision&"a+ing ere a pro!edural "atter%#ut) "ore profoundly) the 9er"an plans for federal politi!al union ithin the European .nion fit inside the3 3E,s o erall plans for the entire !ontinent li+e a $ussian doll% This is for the sa"e philosophi!al reasonsas ha e been outlined abo e%

arl Fa"ers, !on i!tion that national so ereignty has long sin!e be!o"e an illusion !ounts as one of thegreat a!!epted truths a"ong the Europhile !ognos!enti% Indeed) the !o""ents "ade about so ereignty inthe European 3o""unity are generally of an al"ost uni"aginable !rassness and infantility% It is al"osti"possible to find any "odern European politi!ian ho !an !orre!tly define & or e en betray an instin!ti eunderstanding of & national so ereignty) and there are plenty of European intelle!tuals ho ill tell you thatit is an outdated !on!ept% Those in fa or of European integration) for instan!e) ill tell you) in the sa"e

breath) that so ereignty is a "eaningless !on!ept and that the nation&states ha e already lost it any ay%

The argu"ent usually goes li+e this the nation&states of Europe are e!ono"i!ally interdependent and "ustrea!t to e ents outside their indi idual !ontrol% Therefore they are no longer so ereign% The only ay toregain their lost po er Aor 8so ereignty8B is to -oin for!es and a!t together% The for"er #ritish foreignse!retary) Ford Athen ir 9eoffreyB Ho e) has e pressed this thought by riting that 8so ereignty is anation,s pra!ti!al ability to "a+e its influen!e felt in the orld%8

ll this is deeply "isguided% *ar fro" being "eaningless) so ereignty is the definiti e 6uality of a!onstitutionally independent state% If a !ountry is !onstitutionally independent) it is so ereign% !ountrydoes not be!o"e less so ereign if it be!o"es less po erful% To say that 8so ereignty8 is "eaningless is tosay that 8!onstitution)8 8independen!e)8 and 8state8 are "eaningless !on!epts as ell% It is rather li+e

anting to o er!o"e the distin!tion bet een friend and ene"y%

*ar fro" being a !all for all&po erful national go ern"ent) defense of the !on!ept of national so ereigntyis the "ost i"portant defense of de"o!ra!y in "odern Europe% De 9aulle used to say that he !onsiderednational so ereignty and de"o!ra!y to be the sa"e thing% The point about national so ereignty is not thatthe state is either internally or e ternally all&po erful Aalthough there !an) by definition) not be a higher!onstitutional authority than that of a so ereign entityB) it is rather to !larify the sour!e of the authority

hi!h the state e er!ises% If the state is de"o!rati!) that sour!e is the people or the nation% t botto") this

inability to understand so ereignty) and the !on!o"itant ie that it is 8an illusion)8 is based on a si"pleand orrying !onfusion bet een authority and po er) a distin!tion hi!h is the !ornerstone of all legalreasoning% It is e tre"ely orrying that all "odern European politi!ians) al"ost ithout e !eption) "a+ethis error%

This is hy the 3 3E,s pretense to be the sour!e of a ne !onstitutional order for the hole of Europedo etails ith the pro!lai"ed ai" of so"e ery po erful players in European politi!s) "ost notably the9er"an go erning party) to subsu"e national !onstitutions in a European one% Fet us be !lear the easel

ords about 8uniting Europe hile prote!ting national differen!es)8 and the idespread refusal Asu!h asthat of the *ren!h (ri"e Minister Edouard #alladurB e en to address the 6uestion of so ereignty) "eansthat hat is an offer is not a !learly pro!lai"ed intention to repla!e the states of 'estern Europe by onesuper&state) but instead a legal and politi!al order predi!ated on the blurring of those funda"ental !on!epts

hi!h are the building blo!+s of la ) de"o!ra!y) and freedo"%

The rhetori! about borders reinfor!es this do etailing% It is fashionable to say that borders are !o"ing do nall o er Europe) and unfashionable and see"ingly narro &"inded to ant to "aintain the"% In the"o"ents hen $ussia e presses hostility to the east ard e tension of : T?) for instan!e) it protestsagainst 8the !reation of ne lines of di ision in Europe%8 #ut) li+e the others) this politi!al slogan ignoresthe legal i"portan!e of borders) hether national or regional) as de&li"iting do"ains of -urisdi!tion% Inan!ient 9ree+) the ord for 8la )8 no"os) is deri ed fro" ne"ein) to distribute) to possess A hat asdistributedB) or to d ell & to the e tent that Hera!litus !ould pun on 8la 8 and 8hedge)8 as in) 8The peopleshould fight for the la as for a all%8 The la ) indeed) as originally identified ith the boundary line

bet een properties Alater) bet een !itiesB) and e en if the !on!ept of la has e ol ed sin!e) it is !lear that a


8/23

do"ain of -urisdi!tion "ust be spatially defined for it truly to e ist% It is only in the !o""unist "ind that a border need be a barrier%

To abolish borders Arather than to open the"B or to "a+e the" so ast and ague as to be non&e istentA8fro" Lan!ou er to Lladi osto!+8B is ulti"ately to under"ine the rule of la ) for it ris+s abolishing e enthe possibility of statehood% In the E.) outright federalists and !rypto&federalists are united by their failureto understand the legal and politi!al signifi!an!e of borders% In the 3 3E) there is no proposal to abolishnational borders Aindeed their in iolability is one of its !entral !o""it"entsB but rather the ai" is to "a+ethe" irrele ant% #ut states) as the sub-e!ts of international la ) "ust e ist as su!h if international la is toe ist) and they "ust also e ist if do"esti! la is to e ist%

The ad antage of national so ereignty o er supranational so ereignty is that it is based on a reality) na"elythat pre&e isting politi!al entity hi!h is the nation% :ations are not rounded) they gro % E en if a state hasa for"al foundation date) the nation on hi!h it is based ill already ha e !ontained a hole tapestry ofhabits) !on entions) rules) and histori!al and !ultural referen!e points hi!h ill enable it to e ist as a

politi!al entity% It is only hen the !ultural basis for politi!al dis!ourse e ists that de"o!ra!y !an obtain% good !onstitution) li+e good la ) is one hi!h refle!ts reality and does not see+ to destroy it% This is hythe notion that the European parlia"ent !an e er repla!e national parlia"ents as the holder of politi!allegiti"a!y) or e en as a foru" for politi!al a!!ountability and de"o!ra!y) is nai e%

The idespread "isunderstanding of the inherently !onser ati e nature of de"o!ra!y is refle!ted in thestri+ingly unde"o!rati! nature of the 9er"an proposals to !onstru!t a federal union of a 8hard !ore8 ofstates% *irst) the proposals ride a !oa!h and horses through the prin!iple of national self&deter"ination) byinsisting that all European poli!y hen!eforth be "ade by "a-ority ote bet een the "e"ber states% Indeed)they e en pro"ise to pro ide the 8hard !ore8 ith its o n auto!hthonous !onstitution) and to abolish thenational eto on any further !onstitutional and institutional de elop"ents%

This ould be bad enough) ere all the European .nion,s present institutions not already unde"o!rati!%The 3o""ission) the "ost po erful organ in the .nion) is !o"posed of unele!ted offi!ials) and is the soleinitiator) and in so"e !ases) e e!utor of poli!y% It is !onstitutionally independent) i%e% a!!ountable to no one%The 3oun!il of Ministers is also una!!ountable) and it represents as thorough a !onfusion bet eene e!uti e and legislature as it is possible to i"agine% 3o"posed of "inisters fro" ea!h "e"ber state) it isthe supre"e legislati e body of the .nion% :o doubt part of the reason hy European national go ern"ents

are all so +een on the E. is that it enables the") as go ern"ents) to sit in the 3oun!il of Ministers in alegislati e !apa!ity) for the 3oun!il is sub-e!t to no parlia"entary !ontrol hate er% It is unele!ted as a

body Aalthough "ost of its "e"bers are ele!ted in their ho"e !ountriesB) and it ans ers neither to theEuropean parlia"ent nor to national parlia"ents% Its "eetings ta+e pla!e in se!ret and de!isions are ta+en

by "a-ority ote) hi!h e tinguishes all national parlia"entary !ontrol o er its a!ti ities) be!ause) if e er!alled to a!!ount for a ote by his national parlia"ent) a "inister !an al ays plead that he as in a"inority% Indeed) in general ter"s) it is al ays !on enient for national politi!ians to ha e 8Europe8 eitheras a ehi!le ith hi!h to propagate their "ore unrealisti! pro"ises or as a hipping&boy for their o nfailures%

Mean hile) the -udges of the European 3ourt of Gusti!e) the appro i"ate e6ui alent of the upre"e 3ourtof the .nited tates) are ery often not e en -udges by training at all% (erhaps this is hy the 3ourt has athirty year history of bending 3o""unity la A hi!h ta+es i""ediate and total pre!eden!e o er national

la B in order to for!e a greater and greater degree of legal and politi!al !entrali ation%The final indo on national de"o!ra!y ill be shut if) as proposed) Europe adopts a single !urren!y% This

ill be "anaged by an independent 3entral #an+) hi!h is supposed to be sealed off fro" nationalgo ern"ents) parlia"ents) and ele!torates% s the Maastri!ht treaty and the 9er"an go ern"ent "a+eabsolutely !lear) "onetary poli!y is e tre"ely politi!al) for it presupposes that the hole ga"ut of other

poli!ies & fis!al) budgetary) so!ial) foreign and e en defense & be subordinated to its !o""it"ent to theundefined goal of 8pri!e stability%8 s Fa"ers hi"self has said) 8"onetary union is the highest and purestfor" of integration%8 In other ords) the Maastri!ht treaty) hi!h obliges "e"ber states to -oin a "onetaryunion) proposes to transfer the po er !urrently e er!ised by national go ern"ents a!!ountable to national


9/23

parlia"ents to t o una!!ountable institutions) the 3oun!il of Ministers and the 3entral #an+% This "eansthat po er !urrently e er!ised de"o!rati!ally and ithin the fra"e or+ of national !onstitutions ill betransfor"ed into totally dis!retionary po er% #ut go ern"ent is not about ad"inistering so!iety & ani"possible tas+ & it is about upholding the la % .nfortunately) "ost 'estern European states ha e su!h a"oribund politi!al and !i i! !ulture that "ost oters see" a!tually to ant the state to !ontrol their li es atthe pri!e of personal liberty) all in the na"e of se!urity%

'hen 9er"any ratified the Treaty of Maastri!ht in 1== ) it a arded itself t o rights hi!h no other!ountry has ithin the present European legal order% The *ederal 3onstitutional 3ourt at arlsruhe

pro!lai"ed itself the final arbiter in any disputes in interpretation of European 3o""unity la bet eenitself and the 3ourt of Gusti!e of the European 3o""unities in Fu e"bourg% This flies in the fa!e of thirtyyears of 3o""unity -urispruden!e) hi!h insists that 3o""unity la al ays ta+es i""ediate and dire!t

priority o er national la ) e en o er national !onstitutional la %

e!ondly) 9er"any a arded itself the right) through an e tre"ely i"aginati e reading of the treaty) toithdra fro" its !o""it"ent to engage in the pro!ess of "onetary union% Its supre"e -udges argued that

the treaty !o""itted it only to "aintaining pri!e stability) and that if that as yet undefined goal ere to beunfulfilled) then 9er"any !ould ithdra fro" the "onetary union% The !ourt e en e o+ed the possibilitythat ne ) stronger politi!al institutions "ight be ne!essary in order to "a+e the "onetary union or+)noting that in the past) su!h as in the transition of 9er"any fro" :orth 9er"an *ederation to 9er"anE"pire in 1 1) politi!al union had been the prere6uisite for "onetary union% In other ords) the 3D. issaying that "onetary union "ust o!!ur on 9er"any,s ter"s) and those ter"s are the adoption of a federal

politi!al union of fi e !ountries) in hi!h 9er"any alone ill represent 50 per!ent in ter"s of population%

This is hy the 3D. do!u"ent ho ers bet een threats & 8'ithout su!h a !ontinued de elop"ent of A'estBEuropean integration 9er"any !ould be re6uired) or as a result of its o n se!urity needs) te"pted) toensure the stability of Eastern Europe alone and by traditional "eans8 & and professions of European faith%It is also stri+ing that the do!u"ent !alls e pli!itly for *ran!e and 9er"any to e er!ise a hege"ony o erthe peripheral states 8:o substantial a!tion in foreign or European poli!y "ay be ta+en ithout prior*ran!o&9er"an agree"ent%8 Mr% Fa"ers) ho) in a rather o yre ian phrase) !alls the #ritish Euros+epti!s8national ideologues)8 glosses the sa"e thought by saying that the 8hard !ore8 ould e er!ise 8anirresistible for!e8 on the peripheral states) and that any atte"pt to resist that for!e ould be 8self&!enteredand ulti"ately irrational%8

(erhaps the "ost stri+ing re"ar+ in Fa"ers, ritings is the !lai" that 9er"any had understood the lessonsof European history better than other states be!ause of 8the !atastrophe of 1=45%8 This is a surprisingly!o""on re"ar+ in "odern 9er"any% ?ne ould e pe!t 9er"ans to say that they ha e learned theirlessons fro" hat happened in 1= or 1= =) not 1=45% Most Europeans) li+e "ost "eri!ans) see May1=45 not as the date of the i!tory of the llies o er 9er"any) but of the i!tory of de"o!ra!y o erdi!tatorship) and thus no !atastrophe% #ut if "odern 9er"an poli!y"a+ers say that it is fro" 1=45 that theyha e learned the lessons of history) then the lesson in 6uestion !an only be that 9er"any !an ne er su!!eedin do"inating Europe on its o n) and !on ersely) that hege"ony !an only be e er!ised together ithothers) be!ause it is at its ea+est hen surrounded by ene"ies% 9er"any,s need for allies is due to its

ulnerable position in the !enter of Europe its po er is aug"ented hen a !lut!h of allies is gathered on itsfrontiers) espe!ially if for e!ono"i! or politi!al reasons they are obliged to toe the 9er"an line% This is

hat is happening both in the proposed !reation of a hard !ore for 'estern Europe and ith the east ard

e tension of the European .nion to in!lude all 9er"any,s for"er !lient states in Eastern Europe%It is stri+ing that no *ren!h politi!ian see"s to understand ho badly 9er"any needs *ran!e in order to!lothe its hege"ony in 'estern Europe in respe!tability% *ran!e is the de!ent apparel ith hi!h 9er"an

po er !an gird its loins) for if *ran!e ere not in the hard !ore) then the European .nion ould !learly bea 9er"an e"pire% It is note orthy) therefore) that 9er"any proposes to e er!ise its po er behind a *ren!hAor EuropeanB fig&leaf) a !on enient ay of not assu"ing its responsibilities%

It is in this ein that "ost 9er"an politi!ians !all for the old do!trine of the 8balan!e of po er8 in Europeto be o erthro n% It is odd that this ie should be politi!ally !orre!t these days) for 9er"an leaders fro"


10/23

aiser 'ilhel" II to Hitler ha e sung the sa"e song) arguing that the balan!e of po er in Europe isnothing but a perfidious #ritish Aor so"eti"es "eri!anB poli!y to ensure that the !ontinental European

po ers re"ain ea+% (roposals to reinfor!e politi!al union in Europe & hether in *ran!e or in 9er"any &are nearly al ays a!!o"panied by an e pression of desire for Europe to affir" its po er against "eri!aand Gapan% #ut hat su!h e pli!it or i"pli!it atta!+s on the balan!e of po er !on eniently obs!ure is thefa!t that those !ountries hi!h ha e supported the do!trine of the balan!e of po er ha e ne er had anyhege"onial a"bitions on the !ontinent) unli+e those hi!h re-e!t it% 'hat !ould be a better prin!iple for thego ern"ent of the European !ontinent than that a !ertain e6uity or balan!e be "aintained bet een the"a-or po ers7 'e ha e already seen that pea!e and the "aintenan!e of la depends upon su!h an e6uity%Indeed) the do!trine of the balan!e of po er is one of the isest and "ost profound insights into the aythe European !ontinent should operate) and it is sad to see it being s!orned yet again% If the "yth ofdestabili ing European nationalis" & and the !on!o"itant ie Nthat it !an be !ontained only ithinsupranational organi ations & !ontinues to !ast its spell o er the de!isions of Europe,s politi!al ar!hite!ts)then it ill pro e to be a self&fulfilling fantasy%

1 3lause it in fa!t did not rite hat e eryone +no s he rote% 'hat he asserted as) 8'ar is nothing but the !ontinuation of politi!al inter!ourse "i ed ith other "eans%8 Lo" riege) III% Teil) #erlin) 1 4) p%140%

2 Tho"as #uergenthal) 8The 3 3E $ights yste")8 The 9eorge 'ashington Gournal of International Faand E!ono"i!s) ol% 25) no% 2) 1==1) p% 0%

Gohn Faughland is le!turer in philosophy and politi!s at the Institute of (oliti!al !ien!e in (aris% He is aregular !o""entator on European affairs for the pe!tator and the 'all treet Gournal AEuropeB% His boo+)The Death of (oliti!s *ran!e under Mitterrand is re ie ed in this issue%

3?(


11/23

8 "eri!an Europe%8 nd 8free Europe8 has been seen) sin!e 3harles de 9aulle) as in!luding $ussia de9aulle sought a 8Europe fro" the tlanti! to the .rals8 that ould !o"pete ith the .nited tates for

orld hege"ony% #ut it had to be a!hie ed in stages% The first had to in ol e forging an allian!e bet een*ran!e and 9er"any% 8Europe)8 pro!lai"ed de 9aulle) 8is *ran!e and 9er"any the rest are -usttri""ings%8 De 9aulle,s go ern"ent put for ard in the early 1=>0s a plan) the *ou!het plan) that un!annily

prefigured the 3hira!& !hroeder plan for an intergo ern"ental politi!al union in effe!t an anti&de"o!rati!superstate run by *ran!e and 9er"any ith s"all !ountries s6uashed% It is hardly a "ystery) then) thata!!ession !ountries) "ost of the" for"er pro in!es of the o iet e"pire) are beginning to feelun!o"fortable about the i"perialis" of *ran!e% 3hira!,s #re hne &li+e instru!tion to the" to shut up andnot atte"pt to "eddle in the affairs of gro n&ups rightly infuriated the") and the -oint *ran!o&9er"an&$ussian approa!h to the Ira6 6uestion -ust as rightly orries the"% The prospe!t of assal status in a*ran!o&9er"an !ondo"iniu" as staging&post to a *ran!o&9er"an&$ussian !ondo"iniu" is ne er going to

be an attra!ti e one%

To "a+e things orse) the threatened 83onstitution8 ill ensure that the *ran!o&9er"an e"pire ill ha ethe !hara!teristi!s of a :e o iet .nion% It ill in!orporate the so&!alled 3harter of *unda"ental $ights)

hose terrifying arti!le 52 ordains) in polar opposition to the .% % #ill of $ights) that all freedo"s&&ofspee!h) of the press) of asse"bly) of politi!al asso!iation) fro" arbitrary arrest) fro" punish"ent ithoutlegal san!tion) fro" unfair trial) e en fro" torture&&shall be ta+en a ay if 8"ade ne!essary by the pursuit of the ob-e!ti es of the .nion%8

o -oining the :e o iet .nion ill) for the a!!ession !ountries) "ean !onde"nation to assal status inan anti& "eri!an) repressi e e"pire% They "ay regard the .nited tates as potentially their prote!toragainst the orst aspe!ts of the : .% #ut the .nited tates is not going to -oin the : .% nd 3hira! is asan ious to ensure that the a!!ession !ountries do not i"port pro& "eri!an attitudes into the : . as de9aulle as forty years ago to +eep #ritain) suspe!ted of being a Tro-an Horse for the .nited tates) out% o

hy "ight the go ern"ents of the a!!ession !ountries !hoose to shut up rather than stay out7

The : . ill pro ide subsidies to the a!!ession !ountries; 3hira! presu"ably !al!ulates that the a!!essiontreaties ill thus repli!ate the Treaty of Do er Athe se!ret treaty in hi!h 3harles II pledged England,s

politi!al and na al support to Fouis OIL,s foreign poli!y in return for sub entionsB% In addition) as theillusions of the $ubin orld&&the belief that global free&"ar+et !apitalis" not only is good in itself A hi!his trueB but also "a+es geopoliti!s redundant A hi!h is patently untrueB&&slip a ay) the a!!ession !ountries

ill fear a return to the intera!tion bet een trade and politi!s that plagued the 1=50s and 1=>0s% #ritainfor"ed the e en in 1=5= be!ause it feared that the i ould be prote!tionist and e !lude

#ritain fro" so"e of its "a-or "ar+ets% Then&(ri"e Minister Harold Ma!"illan rote !onfidentially that)8*or the first ti"e sin!e the :apoleoni! era the "a-or !ontinental po ers are united in a positi e e!ono"i!grouping) ith !onsiderable politi!al aspe!ts) hi!h) though not spe!ifi!ally dire!ted against the .nited

ingdo") "ay ha e the effe!t of e !luding us both fro" European "ar+ets and fro" !onsultation inEuropean poli!y%8 s a *oreign ?ffi!e offi!ial rote) again !onfidentially) in 1=5=) 8E*T as for"ed

pri"arily as an e!ono"i! defense organi ation and the si"ile of a bridge&head ould in fa!t ha e been"ore apt than that of the bridge%8

#ritain ne er really belie ed E*T !ould last its real purpose as as a bargaining&!hip that !ould lead to aider European free trade area en!o"passing both the i and the e en% #ut a free trade area as

absolutely the last thing *ran!e anted its ai"s ere indeed geopoliti!al) :apoleoni!% nd #ritainre!ei ed no support fro" the .nited tates) hose poli!y as une6ui o!ally Aand e tre"ely nai ely andshort&sightedlyB ai"ed at !reating a politi!al union in Europe&&and initially anted #ritain out be!ause it)

-ust li+e de 9aulle) belie ed #ritish entry ould "a+e full polit i!al union "ore diffi!ult% :o the heel isturning full !ir!le% s distrust bet een the .nited tates and 8old Europe8 gro s e er "ore "ar+ed) theris+ that the : . see+s to use trade restri!tions as a geopoliti!al eapon is rising% *or #ritain) as for thea!!ession !ountries) the !hoi!e "ay yet be bet een a!!epting the e tin!tion of national independen!e)de"o!ra!y) and freedo" in an anti& "eri!an : . or ha ing to fa!e the e6ui alent of :apoleon,s3ontinental yste" of trade e !lusion%


12/23

3ould the .nited tates help no by offering an tlanti! *ree Trade rea) for hi!h #ritain !a"paignedigorously but unsu!!essfully in the 1=50s7 ny su!h offer ould no fa!e strong opposition fro" #ritish

(ri"e Minister Tony #lair) truly a ould&be :apoleoni! figure) ho +no s that in an *T the -obopportunities for Messiahs ould be li"ited% nd if it ere nonetheless "ade) the .nited tates ould ris+

idening the split bet een 8old Europe8 and 8ne Europe8 and "ight find itself fa!ed ith *ran!o&9er"ania and its Fo 3ountry satellites) o!!upying appro i"ately the territory of the e"pire of3harle"agne) as ene"y% #ut the "ore li+ely effe!t of su!h an offer ould be to isolate *ran!e and #elgiu"fro" 9er"any) the :etherlands) and 8ne Europe%8 It !ould pre ent the !reation of a hostile and internallyri en : . that ould) under *ren!h leadership) see+ to -oin hands ith $ussia against the .nited tates% It

ould help preser e the open and !apitalist orld trade and finan!ial syste") hi!h ill other ise be inserious danger% It ould definitely be the better alternati e%

adly) it "ay already be too late for so"e 8ne Europe8 !ountries&&(ortugal) pain) and Italy% 'hy7#e!ause they are in the European "onetary union% These three non&3arolingian !ountries ere allo ed intothe euro at the insisten!e of *ran!e) ho sa the" as l i+ely "onetary allies against 9er"any% :o ) theire!ono"ies are in arying stages of disarray as the result of the euro% (ortugal) at least) is fa!ing a loo"inge!ono"i!) finan!ial) politi!al) and so!ial !risis e en orse than that hi!h !on ertibility for!ed on

rgentina% (ortugal !an be bailed out only by large) per"anently "aintained transfers fro" 8Europe%8 Inreturn) (ortugal ill be e pe!ted to fall in line ith 8old Europe8 and to e"bra!e the : .) a deal indeed"i"i!+ing the Treaty of Do er% 'hen in 1= 1 then&(ri"e Minister ir Ed ard Heath re&sub"itted #ritainfor and to E3 entry) *ren!h (resident 9eorges (o"pidou said to his !onfidantes that) 8Ge la eu nue8&&andHeath a!!epted the prin!iple of the "onetary and politi!al union that ould strip his !ountry of so ereigntyand independen!e% If the a!!ession !ountries repeat (ortugal,s "ista+e and -oin not only the E. but also theeuro) then *ran!e ill ha e the" not only na+ed but tou!hing their toes% It should !ertainly be a priority of.% % diplo"a!y to see+ to dissuade the"%

#ernard 3onnolly is !hief e!ono"ist) I9) and author of The $otten Heart of Europe The Dirty 'ar forEurope,s Money%

3?(/1/2002; :o a+y) Er sebet

ear!h for "ore infor"ation on High#ea" $esear!h for european geopoliti!s%

bstra!t

.sing the so&!alled Transition (arado for "ethodologi!al rene al in futures studies) this arti!le deri esone parado plus si dile""as% The analysis !on!ludes that "ethodologi!al rene al should be e"beddedin the rene al of s!ien!e% The po er of ne paradig"s depends on ho "u!h they ser e the long run

elfare) stability and e isten!e of the hole orld population% Methods && and the brea+through strategiesof the East&3entral European !ountries && are intended not only for outlining isions) but also for !reatingtheir te!hnologi!al) institutional and other foundations so that they do not re"ain "erely utopias% !ien!eFtd% ll rights reser ed%

1% Introdu!tion

The s"all) se"i&peripheral !ountries of East&3entral Europe ha e been fa!ing a serious politi!al !hallenge%The !ollapse of the bipolar) !o""unist&!apitalist orld syste" has put an end to the ho"ogeneous Easternand 'estern so!ial stru!tures and the isions that ere reliant on blo!+ se!urity% t the sa"e ti"e the


13/23


14/23

Transition refers not to the reshaping or a ne stage of !apitalis" but to the erosion of its bases% 'e thin+that the transition fro" !apitalis" to a ne ) hu"an syste" is a pro!ess o er a !entury and a half) ha ingstarted gradually after the 1 4 re olutions% This pro!ess has rea!hed 6ualitati ely ne !hanges throughglobali ation) and te!hnologi!al) intelle!tual re olution% t the sa"e ti"e the !ontradi!tion bet een!apitalis" and the ne needs is rea!hing its pea+%

Te!hnologi!al de elop"ent has !reated the te!hni!al ba!+ground to ne so!ial&e!ono"i! for"ations)rather than -ust "oderni ed the infrastru!tural basis of the e bipolar& elfare orld% The Transition(arado dra s attention to the fa!t that "ethodologi!al debates and the futures of futures studies aree"bedded in the debate o er the !o"ing orld syste" hi!h gi es the possibility of) and re!ogni es theneed for) the "ass population to a!ti ely parti!ipate in its !reation% ?ne ho !onsiders the futures of futuresstudies has to integrate the aspe!t of "ethodology) -ust as hoe er thin+s of the future of "ethods has to!onsider resear!h on the ne orld order% *ro" a s!ientifi! point of ie this "eans that the ti"e is ripefor integrating episte"ology and ontology again) hi!h ere separated in the European Enlighten"ent% sfor te!hnologi!al foundations) it is infor"ation and spa!e te!hnology && hi!h parado i!ally ere !reated

by the do"inant "indset && that "a+e possible a return to an!ient traditions) su!h as Indian) Isla"i!)3hinese) 9ree+) 3hristian) et!% In addition) these te!hnologies allo adaptation of traditions to the globalso!iety of si billion people%

Transition has been ta+en seriously by both e olutionary futurists C1 and "a!rohistorian futurists C2 % The6uestions they address are ho so!ial transfor"ation !an be in estigated other than by linear "ethods; and

hat for!es play the do"inant role% s e!ono"ists) too) e ould e"phasi e that the present transition ise"bedded in an e!ono"i!&&te!hnologi!al en iron"ent that basi!ally differs fro" the industrial era%

The e!ono"i!&&te!hni!al foundations of the global orld !all for a ne "indset% 'e need to be !ons!iousof these !hanges in order to brea+ the Transition (arado and to find ne ays to brea+ out of the East&3entral European se"i&periphery% The +ey issues) hi!h highlight the !ore) !an be stru!tured as *ig% 1sho s% 'e interpret the" as dile""as) though in all !ases they are not real dile""as% The topi!s) !ertainly)are highly interrelated sin!e they are the different sides of the sa"e !oin%

C*I9.$E 1 ?MITTED

% Methods ersus "ethodology

Dile""a one Do the futures of futures studies "ean rene al7 If yes) hi!h of the follo ing the rene alof "ethods or of "ethodology7

The Transition (arado is the !onse6uen!e of 6uestioning "ethodologi!al rene al% Ho e er) e perts ta+edifferent pla!es in this issue) hi!h "a+es a distin!tion bet een "ethods and "ethodology% o"e!on!entrate only on the te!hni6ues && say "ethods && o ing to the reasoning that ie points al ays !hangeauto"ati!ally and !an be left out of sight% The rene al in this !ase refers only to the "ethods and appearsas a 6uestion of dida!ti!s redu!ed to tools% ?thers put the rene al of the ay of thin+ing && say"ethodology && to the forefront on the basis that the !hange in paradig"s "eans a ne sense of reason anda !hange of "ethods auto"ati!ally follo s the !hanged perspe!ti es% In this sense "ethodology refle!tssub-e!ti e fa!tors and the "ethods related to the"%

'e are of the opinion that "ethods) as te!hni6ues) are a part of "ethodology and both aspe!ts of"ethodology suffer !hange in transiti e periods%

The "ethodologi!al rene al C has been integrating

@ rene al of the ay of thin+ing and the approa!h to the topi! under fore!asting Ai%e% the rene al of the"ethodologi!al groundsB;

@ rene al of "ethods and te!hni6ues used in futures studies Ai%e% the rene al of the "ethodologi!alstorehouse of futures studiesB%


15/23

The "ethodologi!al storehouse of futures studies is under t o +inds of rene al% *utures studies i tselfstri es to elaborate ne "ethods and further de elops the tried and tested ones that are suited to pro ideguidan!e) e en a"id the !ir!u"stan!es of instability arising fro" the transition) as regards the possiblefuture alternati es e pe!ted to e entuate% t the sa"e ti"e futures studies also e a"ines the range of"ethods used in other fields) su!h as so!iology) the natural s!ien!es A"ainly biology and physi!sB and

politi!al e!ono"y to see hether the results a!hie ed in these spe!ifi! areas !an be put to use infore!asting%

The "ethodologi!al storehouse rene al in!ludes

AaB 8:e 8 "ethods && for e a"ple) storytelling "ethod) futures or+shop te!hni6ues) 6uest te!hni6ues)!asual layered analysis or anti!ipatory a!tion learning && that rely on indi idual !reati ity and on groupthin+ing% These "ethods help to !arry out en iron"ental s!anning and pro ide a""unition for theelaboration of strategies% The "ethods the"sel es are in "ost !ases !ertainly not ne % o"e date ba!+thousands of years; others ha e been used for de!ades% The point is that these "ethods are be!o"ingdo"inant in the ne "indset% :e ertheless) in European geopoliti!s and in the brea+through of the postso!ialist) East&3entral European !ountries) they are ne %

AbB ?ld "ethods && for e a"ple) ti"e series analysis and the syste" dyna"i!s "ethod && in a ne light!on!entrate on the analysis of stability) na"ely hat !hara!teri es these series stability in the professional)"athe"ati!al sense) its "odifi!ation or a total la!+ of it) that is) instability% In unstable periods stability isnot e ident% Trend analysis gi es pla!e to e a"ining the statisti!al balan!e and !haos !al!ulations% In itsne for") the syste" dyna"i!s "ethod does not only !on!entrate on see+ing a stable !ourse but alsoin estigates unstable ones due to positi e feedba!+%

A!B ?ld "ethods in ne attire && Delphi "ethod and s!enario "ethod && here ne !ir!u"stan!es for!efuturists to ta+e into a!!ount) also) the -udge"ent of non&e perts hen outlining the future% It is not only thea erage opinions that "ay e press the "ost probable or "ost desirable future) but also the 8outlier8 ones%*urther"ore) the s!enario "ethod is able to syste"ati e the results of different "ethods as ell as a arietyof futures) alues and a!tions%

AdB :e !o"binations of "ethods ser e "ore than "eeting the !hallenges of instability; they ta+e into

a!!ount the isioning po er of indi iduals as ell% *or e a"ple) !o"bining the Delphi "ethod) thes!enario "ethod and the futures or+shop te!hni6ue is parti!ularly ad antageous hen non&e perts) as

ell as e perts) are in ol ed in e ploring possible alternati es of the future% 3o"bining !haos !al!ulationsith the analysis of future orientation rests on the notion that Apositi e or negati eB attitudes to

syste"ati!ally&generated future possibilities are easier to e plore if e ha e infor"ation !on!erning thefuture orientation of the groups under s!rutiny%

Ho e er) inno ation in!luded in the "ethodologi!al storehouse !annot be understood and applied ithout!hanging the "indset% The "ethodologi!al grounds e press hi!h theoreti!al paradig" our resear!h andfore!asting are e"bedded in) and assist in the sele!tion of "ethods that should be used a"id different"ethodologi!al approa!hes% This +ind of rene al !an be !hara!teri ed in si ays

@ the possibility of !ognition and deter"ination of the future;

@ the spa!e and ti"e di"ension of the future;

@ the alternati es of future;

@ the !o"ple ity of the future;

@ the proble" of !o""ensurability; and

@ the reliability of fore!asts%


16/23

These aspe!ts refle!t the "ain dile""as of the futures of futures studies%

4% 3ultural ersus te!hni!al issue

Dile""a t o Is the rene al of "ethodology a 6uestion of !ulture or of te!hni6ues7

?ur "ain state"ent is that the future of future studies as ell as its "ethodologi!al rene al is do"inated by !ulture% The distin!tion bet een "ethodologi!al grounds and "ethodologi!al storehouse has highlightedthat) although both sides are under !hange) it is the "ethodologi!al grounds that play the deter"inant role%In our !ase the e tension of the E. appears as a legal proble" in the propaganda% Ho e er) the a!6uis!o""unitaire is not only a 6uestion of organi ational te!hni6ue but it also refle!ts the ideology of theEuropean !entre to ards the se"i&periphery%

It is first of all !ultural and "oral alues that deter"ine the tas+s and the dire!tions of futures studies in thefuture% The te!hni6ues are only "eans that !an ser e opposite ai"s as ell% The re!ognition of "orality and!ulture in s!ien!e) as ell as its underta+ing) are the ele"ents that !an "a+e futures studies an integrati edis!ipline and "ainstrea"% The ne paradig"s of futures studies ha e already !hanged their ai"s toin estigate possible futures that are different in funda"ental alues and to as+ hi!h +ind of future e ishto !reate% It is only on this basis that the E. !an !ons!iously ensure that the e tension of the integrationshould not be "e!hanisti! and that the ision of the potential "e"bers does !ount and ill i"pro e therene al of integration%

Ho e er) te!hni6ues and "ethods) as ell as the e!ono"i!) institutional foundations of the 6ualitati elydifferent isions) are si"ilarly i"portant% *utures studies should not stop at the in estigation of differentand ishful alues) but should ta+e an a!ti e part in the !reation of their te!hnologi!al ba!+ground &&other ise !ulture) ethi!s and alues re"ain only a ser"on% The idea of a united Europe A ith e6ual

partnersB is ery old but !annot be fulfilled until the te!hnologi!al infrastru!ture !reates the possibility too er!o"e real&politi!s) !lassi!al diplo"a!y and e ploitation%

This is here the futures of futures studies definitely !all for transdis!iplinarity and "ulti!ulturalis"%*utures studies should "a+e a !o"parison of the rene al efforts of other dis!iplines) "ainly in the field ofso!ial s!ien!es%

no ledge about reality is a !ru!ial issue in the rene al of futures studies% If the future unfolds as the!ontinuity of the past and the present) then the possibility of a !ognition of the future is based on !lassi!)

positi ist philosophi!al and "ethodologi!al prin!iples the profound study of pheno"ena Atenden!ies ande entsB of the past and the present "ay lead to an altogether "ore thorough +no ledge of future

pheno"ena% If the future is not rooted in the past and the present) if it "anifests itself in a ne for")ho e er) this !lassi! !ourse of +no ing it ill not lead to the e ploration of a 6ualitati ely ne future%3ognition re6uires a ne approa!h that !an rely on the !rut!hes of a future&oriented ie and a ay ofthin+ing that re ises and reassesses the past and the present% These options appear as t o e tre"ealternati es of the E. e tension either !ontinuing the refle es of the !oloni ation "indset to get to neresour!es) or gi ing pla!e to the integration of alternati e isions and ie points of the se"i&periphery that"ay put European de elop"ent on a ne !ourse%

The !ultural approa!h "a+es !hanges in the interpretation of +no ledge as ell% ?ne ie point denies+no ledge and a!!epts only interpretation) hile others do not gi e up the possibility of !ognition) butredefine it and put it into ne !ir!u"stan!es%

The ne approa!h pla!es the e"phasis on e ploring a series of turning points and 6ualitati ely ne ) oftenin!al!ulable) situations% The sense and ai" of possibility of !ognition is stri ing to +no not the repetitionsinherent in !ontinuity but the !hanges and rene al instead%

Though indi idual or !ultural&so!ial Alo!alB !ognition and -ust interpretation are e"phasi ed by the post"odern) di ersity should gi e pla!e to !o""on +no ledge as ell% This "eans that the role of futures


17/23

studies should preser e the in estigation of global !ulture; ho e er) not in an isolated and e !luding ay%The role of !o""on +no ledge in the future either as a ay of so!ial "anage"ent or for lin+ing isioningand de!ision&"a+ing is already analy ed and e"phasi ed C4 %

This +ind of !hange in !ognition results in the past) present and future being thro n off balan!e instatisti!al ter"s) and in a !onse6uent relegation of traditional "athe"ati!al and statisti!al "ethods% #y thesa"e to+en) it entails a ne ly gained pro"inen!e for e pert "ethods A hi!h !reate the !onne!tion bet eenthe past and the present and the !hanged) ne futureB that apply intuiti e ays of !ognition%

The !ultural deter"ination of "ethodology underlines the i"portan!e of the sub-e!ti e obser er) ofresponsibility) of alternati es) of 6ualitati e analysis) et!% These are the topi!s e !ontinue ith%

5% !ientifi! ersus non&s!ientifi! area

Dile""a three Is futures studies a dis!ipline of s!ien!e or should it deny s!ien!e7

The "ethodologi!al rene al of futures studies is part and !onse6uen!e of a pro!ess of general"oderni ation and !hange of paradig" that is under ay in a nu"ber of fields of s!ien!e) a"ong the"futures studies) during the late 20th !entury% The need for this rene al is generated not only by !o""onde"ands on s!ien!e but also by the fa!t that people,s faith in s!ien!e is flagging% The un!ertainty that hasin!reased as a result of instability and transfor"ation has gi en rise to a ne situation in the daily routine of so!iety and in s!ientifi! l ife ali+e) pro iding a brand ne !hallenge for futures studies and futuresresear!hers%

3lassi!al futures resear!h !onsidered itself to be s!ientifi!% Its "ain target) that is the e ploration of the"ost probable future) as based on the assu"ption that) pro ided it per!ei es the la s of reality in the right

ay) it !an "a+e !orre!t predi!tions of the !o"ing future% This is the reason hy futures resear!h put thee"phasis on an in estigation of the de elop"ent tenden!ies of the ob-e!ti e) per!ei able reality% Its"ethodology adapted the !hara!teristi!s of positi ist s!ien!e and preferred the hard) 6uantitati e "ethodsas ell as te!hni6ues refined fro" sub-e!ti e ele"ents of e perts, -udge"ents% Thus it follo ed that onlyone type of future !ould be outlined) be!ause of "ono!ultural patterns) and this as !riti!ally debated bythe resear!hers of so&!alled futures studies% The !lassi!al approa!h has ea+ened o ing to the !hangingreality as ell) resulting in the fa!t that the predi!ted futures did not !o"e about in "ore and "ore !ases%

The re!ognition of de elop"ent tenden!ies has be!o"e e er dissol able% *urther) this is the !ase be!ause of e"erging) alternati e approa!hes) su!h as those of *ou!ault and post!olonial theory as ell as postnor"als!ien!e) Isla"i! s!ien!e and fe"inist s!ien!e) et!% C5 %

The debate o er futures studies being s!ientifi! or non&s!ientifi! has been rene ed in the years ofTransition% The ne paradig"s turn a ay fro" !lassi!al s!ien!e and in the "ethodologi!al rene al they tryto find ne approa!hes and ne "ethods that gi e "ore spa!e to sub-e!ti e te!hni6ues && su!h as futures

or+shops) isionary "anage"ent) te!hnology foresight&& as ell as to !o"ple ity or "odels that e"bra!ee"piri!al) interpretati e) !riti!al theory) !asual layered analysis and a!tion learning% This e!le!ti! approa!h

per"its learning fro" ea!h one C> %

#y re!ogni ing its o n barriers) futures studies no longer stri es to be s!ientifi!% Ho e er this "ust not"ean that futures studies should gi e up being s!ien!e% $ather) it should enri!h s!ien!e ith the ie point)

ai") !ulture) et!%) of the indi idual and of the resear!her%3on!entrating on the openness of the future) either fro" e olutionary un!ertainty or e isting un!ertainty)the ne paradig"s "ade huge steps to ards the rene al of s!ien!e) though so"eti"es they did notunderta+e it% Deri ed fro" the analysis of e"ergent !o"ple syste"s li+e the global orld) post&nor"als!ien!e puts the e"phasis on the role and responsibility of the obser er% The ne approa!h denies theseparation of the ob-e!ti e orld and the outside obser er%

'hen e understand the proble" of separating hu"an+ind fro" nature e !o"e to the !on!lusion that a"ethodology does not la!+ alues; there is no su!h ob-e!ti e orld) and being a s!ientist is al ays


18/23

nor"ati e% u!h an approa!h to s!ien!e ill "a+e it !lear to people in the se"i&periphery that there are"a!rohistori! transfor"ations in pro!ess in hi!h our de elop"ent is e"bedded in the global !onte t)although "u!h do"inated by the European !entre% These pro!esses are ob-e!ti e in a different ay and donot follo the 8la s8 of international integration%

in!e futures studies is !on!erned that the use of "ethods should be !ons!ious) the "ain 6uestion is notonly hat "ethod to use but also hether one is a are of using a !learly spe!ified attitude or not% To put itin the e tre"e) no "atter hi!h te!hni6ue is used; the "ain point is to +no !ons!iously hat it is used for C %

nother point is that the futurist should "a+e !lear not only hi!h te!hni6ue is suitable for hat) but alsohether or not s/he is using any "ethod% Thus the futures of futures studies "ethods !annot be e a"ined

and taught in itself) ithout "ethodology%

>% lternati es ersus the future !o"ing into e isten!e

Dile""a three 'hat do different "ethods ha e to in estigate the alternati e futures or the future !o"inginto e isten!e7

3lassi!al futures resear!h ai"s to redu!e the ris+ and une pe!tedness of the future and to outline the possibilities of !hange and de elop"ent% The output is Pif&then, types of state"ents referring to the future

ith !ertain probabilities) although in a preli"inary and pro isional ay; but the future !an be re ealed andre!ogni able%

The alternati e nature of the future has gro n stronger be!ause the !han!e of unstable states arising hasalso in!reased% E ents and pheno"ena ha e be!o"e "ore !o"ple ) and be!ause the differen!e bet een a

possible and a desired future has in!reased in "any fields% In!reasing so!ial parti!ipation in shapingob-e!ti es and the "eans for a!!o"plishing the" further enhan!es this alternati e nature% Indi iduals andso!ial groups ish to "ould not only their o n future but the general shape of the future) too% .nli+e the

past) people no feel a stronger need to !o"pare and eigh the different options ahead of the") ta+earious points of ie into !onsideration and "a+e a responsible de!ision about a!!epting one or "ore of

the"% These ele"ents are e"phasi ed by t o ne !on!eptual&&"ethodologi!al fra"e or+s) that is)e olutionary and !riti!al futures studies C %

!o"parati e analysis of the alternati es !o"pletes the fore!asting a!ti ity and fore!asting itself) andhelps users to gain a better understanding of the differen!es a"ong alternati es% t the sa"e ti"e it !an"ean a basis for for"ulating ays and !onditions of !hanging fro" one alternati e to another% This astypi!ally the !ase in post&so!ialist !ountries here people too+ alternati es seriously as ell as their o nrole in !reating the"% Ho e er) the 8disappoint"ent8 in the rea!tion of the !entre Arelu!tan!e in supportingthe real a!!ession to the European integrationB as ell as the alternati e of i""orality Athe suppressed ti"e

period of a!!u"ulation of !apitalB soon pro ed that the possibility of alternati es should not be treated as atoy% nother feature of the early transition as that "any people thought of alternati es as possible !hoi!esa"ong the optional dire!ti es of the go ern"ent) no "atter hi!h one%

lternati es per"eate the hole pro!ess of futures studies fro" the ob-e!ti es to the possible optionsa"ong "eans and ays of a!!o"plishing the"% There is "ore s!ope for using alternati es for possible

ays and "eans than for ob-e!ti es% This is so be!ause the "eans present the"sel es or !an be !reatedin!reasingly fro" the results of earlier and/or a!!o"plishable a!ti ities%


19/23

do"inant "indset and institutions% Ho e er) ithin the fra"e or+s of the bipolar orld syste" they !ouldnot surfa!e% The European .nion first en!ountered the possibility of de"olishing its post& ar stru!ture inMaastri!ht) but the neoliberal ideology of transition o er hel"ed it% The 8transition&energy8) that is) the

illingness of people to be in ol ed in) and !ontinue) !hange) did not last long% Thus the turning points ofde elop"ent be!a"e i"portant indeed%

Ho e er) optional future isions and indi idual !hoi!es "ust not substitute for long&ter" iability% Thusthe !on!ept of alternati es is for ard&loo+ing only ithin the so!ial&e!ono"i!&te!hni!al fra"e or+s thatser e the long&run stability of the global orld% In our !ase) Hungary,s !at!h&up strategy should "a+e !learthat it depends not only on hether so!iety,s alternati e isions are a!+no ledged) but also on hetherthese isions ser e a ne type of European regional !o&e isten!e% *urther"ore) the study of theneo!onser ati e global regi"e of the pre ious t enty years sho s that the de"olition of the bipolar

elfare&state syste" and the transition ere "ore deliberate than e pe!ted% .n!ertainty and !haos ha eser ed not only as a ne "indset of s!ientifi! "ethodology) but also as a type of global order% (eople ha e

been for!ed to thin+ in ter"s of alternati es in their !hoi!es) ho e er) the ne!essary future orientation as!reated in a negati e ay) as future sho!+ C= %

(ost"odernis" has !orre!tly reali ed the i"portan!e of indi idual Alo!alB isions and responsibilities) thedifferentiation of ie points) the 6uantitati e in!onsu"ability of 6ualitati e dis!repan!y) et!% Ho e er) it isunable and un illing to integrate the di ergent) alternati e isions to the e tent here they ser e the sa"efuture ai") that is) to !reate through !o""uni!ation the ideology and the infrastru!tural&institutional basisof the global syste" that has no alternati e && the long&run e isten!e of hu"an+ind% Thus) o ing to !ertainopinions) the futures of futures studies ill not re"ain in the fra"e or+ of either neoliberal indi idualis"and di ersity) or post"odern differentiation% ?r) if so) futures studies !annot be!o"e "ainstrea" C10 %

% Feadership ersus parti!ipation

Dile""a four 'hose ision is the tas+ of futures studies "ethodology and ho !reates these isions7

3lassi!al futures resear!h is based on the uni ersal&&"odernist orld !on!eption !onne!ted to "odernindustrial stru!tures and s!ien!e% The ision of i"pro ing the future for the hole orld) hi!h !an bere ealed) has been fed by an opti"isti! future) hen!e a belief in the te!hnologi!al re olution% The futuristhas be!o"e the 8engineer of the future8) one ho !an outline tenden!ies and !an !onstru!t a better orld%

"ong others) there are three serious proble"s ith the abo e !on!ept% *utures studies) based on !lassi!als!ien!e and rationality) pro-e!ts a +no ledge and a reasoning of past and present on to the future% e!ondly)the global orld is do"inated no by the +no ledge and reasoning of 'estern !i ili ation) ith the abo erestri!tions% *inally) the futurist as an engineer is separated fro" the "ass population and "onopoli es the!reation of the future as an 8e pert8; the engineer !onsiders the orld as a "a!hine fro" an outsider,s pointof ie C11 %

The ne paradig"s of futures studies) "ainly !riti!al futures studies) ha e !hallenged the positi istapproa!h% ll post"odern paradig"s underline the a!ti e role and responsibility of indi iduals and the!ultural di ergen!e of isions% In this sense) the role of futures studies and the futurist is to sho thedi ergen!es and "a+e !ons!ious these differen!es ithout deter"ining the so!ial dire!tion% The !o"peting

isions ill get different so!ial support% Thus all isions !an ta+e part in the 8!o"petition8%

The future is the de"o!rati ation of futures studies% Ho e er) this ai" or !ulture needs a te!hnologi!al)institutional basis% The possibility to de"o!rati e the future and the s!ien!e of futures has been !reated bythe "i!roele!troni! re olution of the neo!onser ati e era% #ut its !reation has not been at all de"o!rati!) itsfulfil"ent is full of !ontro ersies and its neoliberal ideology is in !ontrast ith the ne internationalnet or+s% o the e tension of the parti!ipation pro!ess has needed leadership; ho e er) it does not "eanthat the Euro& tlanti! "indset ill or should dire!t the ne orld order% This era of Transition is alreadyo er) e en if the ne paradig"s are still part of the Transition itself%


20/23

Does "ethodology "onopoli e and !oloni e the future7 E en if e a!!ept that it e presses a !ertain"indset) the ans er is still no% Though the ai" of "ethodologi!al rene al is to re eal different alues and"a+e the" !ons!ious) the rene al in!orporates a definite alue as ell) thus representing leadership ithin

parti!ipation% u!h leadership is neither "onopoli ation nor !oloni ation be!ause the "ethodologi!alrene al is a fluent pro!ess that gi es pla!e to different integrating alues Asu!h as positi is")

post"odernis" and so onB depending on !ertain histori! periods%

% Qualitati e ersus 6uantitati e "ethods

Dile""a fi e Is it 6ualitati e or 6uantitati e "ethods that ill be at the !ore of "ethodologi!al rene al;and hat is the role of infor"ation te!hnology in the rene al7

In stable periods "athe"ati!al&statisti!al "ethods Ae en si"pler trend analysesB ere suitable forfore!asting% Methods based on gathering e perts, opinions pro ided ade6uate guidan!e in the "a e of thefuture% E en "odelling "ethods) today !onsidered as !lassi!al) ere su!!essfully appli!able) as they erereliable in -udging the intera!tion of e ents and trends in hi!h linear relations pre ailed% Today these"ethods "ust be superseded% .nfolding ne trends are no longer an organi! !ontinuity of the past) nor arethey the !onse6uen!es of ob ious turning points) sin!e the fa!tors are !onne!ted in a !o"pli!ated) non&linear deter"inis"%

The ne ) e ol ing paradig"s de elop different groups of "ethods) o ing to !on!eptual differen!es in their "ethodology% E olutionary futures studies !on!entrates on "odel&!reating "ethods) hile the !riti!alapproa!h is "u!h "ore in ol ed in the rene al of sub-e!ti e "ethods C12 % #oth paradig"s e"phasi efuture orientation) though e olutionary futures studies !o"bines the different "ethods in e olutionary"odels and s!enarios% 3riti!al futures studies) ho e er) arri es at sub-e!ti e isions of rational futureoptions C1 %

E olutionary studies is also a good e a"ple for integrating the t o types of "ethod% The general theory ofe olution "ay indi!ate erbally the transition fro" stability to instability) the setting in "otion of the

bifur!ation "e!hanis"s and the do"ain of possible futures% 3haos theory) by outlining the e"ergen!e ofdifferent ne situations a"id !ir!u"stan!es of instability) not only guides us through the -ungle of possiblefuture !ourses/paths but also syste"ati!ally generates the" ith its "ethods ai"ing at 6uantitati enessC14 %

Qualitati e and 6uantitati e approa!hes !annot be separated "e!hani!ally% The de elop"ent of infor"ationte!hnology sho s that they are tightly interrelated% Mi!roele!troni!s is not si"ply the te!hnologi!al basis of "ore effe!ti e usage of old 6uantitati e "ethods) but the basis of a ne "ethodology in itself% 9lobal"odelling as !loser to the in!reasing effi!ien!y of !al!ulation; ho e er) !haos theory has "eant a6ualitati e !hange% In other ords infor"ation te!hnology ser es a !ontinuation of the pre ious so!ial and

orld stru!tures if it is no "ore than a "oderni ation of state and !orporate ad"inistration for "a+ing the""ore effe!ti e% The ai" of East&3entral European !ountries is not a "ore effe!ti e #russels !entre but the

possibility to e press) to spread and to e e!ute their isions%

The 6uantitati e re olution as a 6ualitati e !hange "a+es !lear a future usage for "ulti"edia) !o"puter pa!+ages% The abo e 8dile""as8 ha e e plained that the issue of a 3D&$?M !ontaining a !olle!tion of"ethods !annot be used as an 8anthology8% Methods are not re!eipts and not auto"atis"% They are -ust

"eans) and the futurist should ha e +no ledge of and responsibility for the "eans and purpose of their use%=% E"piri!al ersus theoreti!al e perien!e

Dile""a si 'hat deter"ines the utility of a gi en "ethod the e"piri!al e perien!e or the theoreti!alfra"e or+7

$eliability is the yardsti!+ for the 6uality and ade6ua!y of all futures resear!h and studies% The !on!ept ofreliability is interpreted in different ays in futures studies% ?n the one hand reliability refers to the

proble" that fore!asts !an be !he!+ed only post ho!% ?n the other hand it refers to the responsibility of


21/23

"ethodologi!al analysis and the assess"ent of the database used in "a+ing the fore!ast or in e pressingisions%

ssessing the reliability of s!ientifi! state"ents is indeed an essentially "ore !o"ple tas+ in futuresstudies than in other fields of s!ien!e in general% This ste"s fro" the ery !ore of futures studies) na"elyfro" the fa!t that e "a+e assu"ptions about so"ething that does not yet e ist; or so"ething that e ists

but has not yet surfa!ed and it is not !ons!ious% The reliability of a fore!ast is affe!ted not only by thesub-e!t of the resear!h but also by the un!ertainty !ontained in the pertaining +no ledge% The notion ofreliability in futures studies) therefore) is both ob-e!ti e and sub-e!ti e% Fi+e the pro!ess of !ognition)reliability too !an be interpreted only as a pro!ess) in the light of !hanges ta+ing pla!e in the ob-e!t of thefore!ast and the related +no ledge) and on the basis of the gro ing field of +no ledge%

$eliability in futures studies is a !o"ple notion to be interpreted in its dyna"i!s) hi!h synthesi es the6uantitati e and 6ualitati e assess"ent of !hanges in the fore!ast ob-e!t) the +no ledge needed to "a+e thefore!ast and !onse6uently) and the results% It ans ers to hat e tent fore!asts !an ser e as bases forde!ision&"a+ing and to hat e tent they e plore fa!tors pro"oting progress% fore!ast is reliable if i t hassu!h 6uality inner !ontent that "a+es for the best possible basis for de!ision&"a+ing and) ith itsassu"ptions and effe!ts) ser es progress or a erts dangers as best it !an in the pre ailing syste" ofen iron"ental !onditions% nd it needs a high probability of "ateriali ing% This interpretation of the notionrefle!ts that e lin+ the reliability of fore!asts) li+e the interpretation of fore!asts) to the basing of de!isionsC15 % Ho e er) it is not "ini"u" ris+ and "a i"u" probability that de!ision "a+ing refers to) but the in&

built ability to !reate alternati e futures% Hen!e the proble" of reliability e !eeds fore!asting and re"ainsas a !ore in all futures studies%

E"piri!is") in this sense) is not the erifi!ation of futures studies resear!h) but rather the adaptation of the"ethodology in gi en !ir!u"stan!es% Methodology deter"ines the alues and the ay of thin+ing) hi!h

be!o"e "ore or less stable in the long run) hile e"piri!al e perien!e results fro" the use of different"ethods a!!ording to !hanges in !ultures) ti"e periods et!% ll in all it is the theoreti!al fra"e or+ hi!hdeter"ines the utility of the "ethod; ho e er it is the e"piri!al e iden!e hi!h e aluates the !orre!t) up&to&date reali ation of future isions% t this point e ha e returned to the first 8dile""a8) thus !losing the!ir!le%

10% 3on!lusion

*utures studies as ell as its "ethodologies !an fa!e the !hallenges of the ne era% To brea+ the Transition(arado the rene al of "ethodology should be e"bedded in the rene al of s!ien!e% lthough its ele"entsare not yet !oherent) futures studies has a good !han!e of integrating the "ethodologi!al rene al of otherdis!iplines) thus be!o"ing "ainstrea"% Methods are not for outlining isions) but also for !reating theirte!hnologi!al) institutional and other foundations so that they do not re"ain utopias%

Methodologi!al rene al !an be understood only in relation to the so&!alled Transition (arado % This dra sattention to the fa!t that the in estigation of the future of futures studies and the study of global so!ial&e!ono"i!&te!hnologi!al institutions are t o sides of the sa"e !oin%

Methodologi!al rene al !ontains t o "ain ele"ents% 'e ha e to "a+e a differen!e bet een"ethodologi!al grounds and the "ethodologi!al storehouse% #oth need to be re ie ed in order to "a+e any

sur ey on the futures of futures studies; ho e er i t is the !ultural aspe!t) that is) alues and paradig"se pressed by "ethodologi!al grounds) that do"inates the relationship of the t o%

The "ain aspe!ts of !hanging "ethodologi!al grounds bring so"e !ore 8dile""as8 to the surfa!e% 'e ha etried to su""ari e the essen!e of the ongoing !hanges as ell as the "ain ideas of differen!e% Thedis!ussion of "ethodologi!al rene al is as "u!h a politi!al as a !ultural 6uestion% Hen!e the brea+throughof the post&so!ialist !ountries needs deep theoreti!al !larifi!ation too% The deri ation of the "ain issues is

-ust one of "any steps) and is hat e offer for further dis!ussion% ee A*ig% 1B%


22/23

@ The arti!le has been prepared in the fra"e or+ of ?T resear!h) entitled *utures tudies in E!ono"i!s%(ro-e!t !oordinator Ta"as) 9aspar) (hD%

$eferen!es

C1 ee e%g% braha" $% 3o"ple dyna"i!al syste"s theory Histori!al origins !onte"porary appli!ations%In Fas lo E) editor% The ne e olutionary paradig"; :e %; Fas lo E% The age bifur!ation) :e% *ran+ 9) 9ills #% The orld syste" *i e hundred

years or fi e thousand% Fondon $outledge; 1==>% 9altung G) Inayatullah % Ma!rohistory and"a!rohistorians% :e


23/23

C11 ee laughter $% #eyond the "undane $e!on!iling breadth and depth in futures en6uiry% *utures Ainthis issueB%; :o a+y E) 9aspar T% *inal report of The *irst #udapest *utures 3ourse of the '* *% In

:o a+y E) ristof T) editors The youth for a less selfish future% (apers of the I% #udapest *utures 3ourse%Depart"ent of *utures tudies) #.E #udapest; 1===%

C12 ee Inayatullah) ohail% 3asual Fayered nalysis poststru!turalis" as "ethod% In te enson T% et al%editor% The Quest for the *utures) Methodology e"inar in *utures tudies% *inland *utures $esear!h3entre) Tur+u) 2001% $e rite as *utures) 0A B) 15& 2=) 1==

C1 ee Hideg E% :e paradig"s E olutionary and/or 3riti!al *utures tudies7 In% Hideg E) editor(os t"odern es e olu!io a -o o+utatasban A(ost"odern and E olutionary Ideas in *utures tudiesB)Depart"ent of *utures tudies) #.E #udapest; 1== %

C14 ee :o a+y E% Methodologi!al rene al in futures studies% In te enson T% et al% editor% The Quest forthe *utures) Methodology e"inar in *utures tudies% *inland *utures $esear!h 3entre) Tur+u) 2001%

C15 ee :o a+y E% ?n the "ethodologi!al ground of futures studies% In te enson T% et al% editor% TheQuest for the *utures) Methodology e"inar in *utures tudies% *inland *utures $esear!h 3entre) Tur+u)2001%

Ta"as 9aspar) Er sebet :o a+y*utures tudies 3entre) #udapest .ni ersity of E!ono"i!s !ien!esand (ubli! d"inistration) 10=#udapest) *o a" ter ) Hungary

Er sebet :o a+y) Tel%/fa S >&1&21>&201>% E&"ail addresses ta"as%gaspar -+ut%b+e%hu AT% 9asparB;er sebet%no a+y -+ut%b+e%hu AE% :o a+yB%

3?(

debating the borders of europ1

Documents