Interview
In an interview with Open Citizenship, member of the German Bundestag Manuel Sarrazin spoke about his vision of a federal European Union and what EU citizenship means today. Mr. Sarrazin is also the spokesman for European affairs for Bündnis 90 / Die Grünen and a member of the Committee on the Affairs of the European Union in the German Bundestag.
Mr. Sarrazin, how did you get involved with the EU, migration, youth in Europe and your work in the Committee on the Affairs of the European Union?
Well, before being elected to the Bundestag I spent four years as the European spokesman for the Greens in the Hamburg state parliament. When I was elected to the state parliament, I said: “I want to do Europe!” I was already involved with European issues, both as a member of civil society and within the Green party. Once you discover Europe, it won’t let you go.
The European integration process leads, among other things, nation-states to pool sovereignty in Brussels. In practice, though, we have also observed how Member States try to preserve their sovereignty. What sort of future do you see for nation-states in the EU?
I am a European federalist. Realistically, one has to admit that a federal Europe is only a vision at the moment. Perhaps not even a hope yet. That doesn’t mean that one should not strive for it. However, the notion of whether we need a federal Europe is a philosophical question, which does not help us at the moment. Basically, I believe that the EU – as it exists now and will exist in the next years and decades – is not possible without the nation states. The negation of nation-states would, with the current level of integration, lead to a disruption of the EU. That doesn’t mean that decisions in certain policy areas should not be transferred to the European level. An example could be energy networks or parts of the asylum and immigration policy, which require common standards. Further development is possible within the framework of the Lisbon Treaty and the German Supreme Court’s decision on the treaty. But we need nation-states who define themselves as European and who are willing to contribute to Europe.
When you say that a federal Europe is only a vision or not even a hope, who are the biggest opponents of this vision? Why can’t it simply be implemented?
The history of the nation-state and people’s perceptions of it are the opponents. If you look at the history of the nation-state, you can identify different elements that created various national movements: the creation of a constructed common identity that allows people to distinguish themselves from citizens of other nations by means of history, religion, and unfortunately also war and nationalism.
A European Union in the sense of a European federal state is made difficult in this historical context. We are not interested in repeating the idea of nation-statehood and nationalism at the continental level. The blueprint of the nation-state does not function on the European level. Of course, the European model is based on diversity and not on the need for homogenization. Diversity should be preserved and supported. For example, the Sorbs and the Danes in Schleswig-Holstein were granted additional cultural and political rights through their recognition as cultural minorities, which came from European integration. You could call this a stronger European integration in the sense of a European federal state.
In the last few years, the most important discussions have been concerned with the structural problems of the EU, such as the unsuccessful attempt to pass a constitutional treaty, EU institutions’ distance from the public and the EU’s democratic deficit. From your point of view, could an enhanced EU citizenship be an approach to solving these problems?
Yes, it could be. I believe that politics at all levels should become more European. One possibility could be, for example, that European themes relevant to Hamburg could be discussed with the public two years before being decided by the Council. Then, after the debate, you would try to bring in the political decisions from Hamburg to Berlin and Brussels. Another important element of that is education. It’s important that people learn in school how to participate actively in European politics and that they know their political rights. Finally, we need a feeling of European citizenship that says, ‘We are citizens of the European Union’. Also, people need to realize that EU citizenship preserves their rights and that’s why they should get involved.
With the European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI) EU citizens have an instrument to get involved in politics at the European level. What do you think of the ECI?
It’s too soon to tell. In principle, the ECI offers a great opportunity. Above all, to think about direct democracy on the European level and to try it out with the ECI. This assumes, of course, that the ECI works well from the beginning and stimulates interesting public debates. After we’ve dealt with the ECI for two, five or ten years, we will have a broader foundation on which to discuss direct democracy at the European level.
On the other hand, I have the feeling that the German government, with its current activities in the Council for General Affairs, tries to put people off this attractive instrument. They do this, for example, by requiring people to give their passport number, so that they won’t use the instrument. Indeed, in Germany this is problematic for data protection reasons. I would never put down my passport number.
When working on our inquiry regarding the ECI, which we filed in the Bundestag, we found out that passport numbers aren’t actually required in Germany to find out if someone exists or not. The German census bureau only needs the person’s full name and birth place. I would have no problem sharing that information.
So your current hopes lie with the EU Parliament?
Exactly, on Mr. Häfner (MEP of the Greens). Well, apart from that, we step on the toes of the German government and try to pressure them. After all, we have the FDP, the so-called civil-rights party, in the governing coalition.
More and more EU citizens live a transnational lifestyle in the EU. In this context, how would you rate the current provisions for EU citizenship?
Their possession of fundamental freedoms is a good start. An important provision especially regards people from small Member States. In consular questions and emergency situations they could appeal to another EU country’s consulate if their own country doesn’t have one on location. Local voting rights are still the biggest improvement that has been achieved for EU citizens. EU citizenship is important, but many people still don’t know that it exists and what rights it confers. But it is not yet fully developed and could be improved.
What are the most important elements of a national citizenship for you? In the future, should they also form the basis of an EU citizenship?
You could mention language, identity and voting rights. But not all of these concepts help us with EU citizenship. Connecting language with EU citizenship, for example, doesn’t fit for Europe. It would be better to connect EU citizenship to multilingualism. You have to develop a European vision based on values. This gives school and education a central role.
EU expatriates are currently excluded from regional and national elections. Do you think there is a need for action on the EU level for a new conception of EU citizenship or is it possible to extend voting rights for EU expatriates at the national level?
As long as we have nation-states, there is always the possibility to change something at the national level. We Greens demand voting rights for people who have lived legally in Germany for a certain time and have made Germany their home. We demand, for example, municipal voting rights for immigrants as well as enhanced voting rights for EU citizens who have lived in Germany for over five years. In addition, there is a demand to streamline the nomination process for candidates without German citizenship.
So you think progress is still possible at the national level?
Sure. If we amended the constitution, it should work. In any case, the possibility to change things exists at the national level. Beyond the national level, you could also enhance EU voting rights by amending the treaties. The interesting question here would be: Who is the demos of the European Union? Of course, it should be clear that you are only allowed to vote in one country. We believe strongly that people who have lived in Germany for a long time and made this their home should be allowed to vote here as well.
So you could imagine supporting an initiative that would give third-country nationals local voting rights and also allow non-German EU citizens to vote in regional elections?
Yes, definitely. Even independent of the EU.
Also in terms of the national voting rights for EU citizens? Regional and national voting rights could be embedded in the EU primary law, like local and European voting rights are today.
That’s a nice thought. But the state and national parliaments, unlike the local parliaments, have constitutional standing, so the Supreme Court could get involved. Whether the EU has the legal authority in this case to interfere with the German constitution would be controversial.
Currently EU citizenship exists in addition to national citizenship. Do you see possibilities to enhance EU citizenship further from the current status quo?
Yes, definitely. In addition to voting rights, it would be a step in the right direction to give the European External Action Service consular responsibilities outside the EU. That way a EU citizen could go to a European embassy to conduct his consular affairs.
What is your personal vision of a Europe of citizens?
The most important component of such a vision and the process to create a Europe of citizens is education. EU citizens have to know how they can participate and what role they can play in the EU political system. This means knowing how to express their interests and include their political issues within existing EU decision-making structures. Citizens have to know how they can use their vote to influence EU politics – not only in European Parliament elections but also in Bundestag elections. This also means that national politicians should regularly debate decisions made at the European level with the public and help citizens understand these decisions. The dream of a European public is nice but we have to Europeanize national structures first, because replacing national publics with a European public is not possible at the moment.
Tags: Interview