Interview
In an interview with Open Citizenship, former German presidential candidate Gesine Schwan laid out her views of a Europe of citizens. Mrs. Schwan was president of the Europa University Viadrina in Frankfurt/Oder until 2008 and is currently president at/of? the Humboldt-Viadrina School of Governance in Berlin, which she co-founded.
Mrs. Schwan, you served as the Co-ordinator of the Federal Government for civil social cooperation near to the Republic of Poland from January 2005 to September 2009. What were the most important issues for you and (local?) civil society during that time? Was European citizenship an issue in your work?
The issue of European citizenship was not a focus of my work during that time. My primary task was to help Germans understand Poland. In the beginning, my Polish colleague and I had a lot of ideas for possible German-Polish projects. Unfortunately, the change of governments in both Poland and Germany during that time brought changes in political philosophies and party constellations that made it impossible for us to implement these projects. Then there were the bureaucratic hurdles, which make cross-border cooperation quite difficult.
In Europe, the concepts of national identity and citizenship are especially closely connected. This leads the discussion of European citizenship to revolve around the lack or necessity of an EU identity. Do you see this as necessary as well, or do we need a new approach?
From the political point of view, if the EU is to act as a global player, then it needs the democratic legitimacy of an EU citizenry. Citizenship is something that is created through constant discourse and bridge-building. For me, with the current state of economic globalisation, a citizenship must create political subjects able to act and identify themselves with their country or the EU. Such political identities develop on one hand from individual, subjective memories and on the other hand from identification with a political community. From my point of view, this type of identification process is necessary. This process serves the sense of belonging and political legitimation.
How do you understand identity in this context?
The notion of identity is very complex and comes from a variety of sources. In Germany, there is still the idea that identity is based on history. This means you should identify with German history. When you talk about identity, memory or more precisely cultural memory – both subjective and objective – is very important. The identities of citizens are based on personal memories, which make them unique. But all identities are equally legitimate. It would be foolish and dishonest to demand a single common identity for everyone.
One could ask, though, why you would need a civic identity. For one thing, we need it for technical reasons: for example, to figure out who gets what and how much, such as for pension insurance or social security. Then you would need an identity at the national and EU levels, in order to function as a collective political actor. I think that, in the long-term, national and European citizenship will develop simultaneously because globalisation leads to more diverse societies with diverse historical and individual backgrounds.
What do you think of the idea of a modern, transnational and inclusive EU citizenship? How do you imagine such a thing?
I think highly of such an idea. We need an EU of citizens. If we have a political understanding that is democratic and values-based, then this form of politics can only work in conjunction with an active citizenship. Identification only comes from engagement. Democratically legitimate in this context means legitimated not only through the election process but also through the political results that are aligned with democratically legitimated values. If we want a democratically legitimate EU, we need an active European citizenship.
How would you rate the chances for a modern, transnational and inclusive EU citizenship? Do you think such a thing is necessary?
Citizenship is the fundamental element created by successful democratic policies. If the EU wants to be a political actor, then an EU citizenship is necessary. That creates, however, general questions of political participation.
We see that political participation doesn’t simply decrease, but organizes itself differently – for example, in civic initiatives – and around different issues than before. I believe that, in future, without parties, as well as without national and the European Parliament, we won’t get anywhere. If you as Citizens For Europe e. V., a civic initiative, want to realise your goals, then you don’t just want to mobilise the public but also effect legal changes. For that, you’ll need the more traditional types of participation. Transnational legislation could come, in the context of globalisation, only if actors from the three major sectors worked together: traditional politicians, national or European; organized civil society, again, either national or transnational, including particularly important unions; as well as the private sector or businesses. That won’t happen without conflict, so I like to use the term ‘antagonistic cooperation’.
EU citizens living outside of their country of origin – that is, EU expatriates – are currently excluded from regional and national elections in their place of residence. Third-country nationals are excluded from local and European elections as well. Would you say that expanding political participation rights would lead to a stronger identification with the EU?
Yes. The problem of low political participation has many facets. I think cultural openness is very central to European citizenship. But there are also other elements, such as social participation, equal opportunities in the educational system and cultural engagement. These are things that should be supported, in addition to political participation.
Currently EU citizenship exists only in addition to national citizenship. If EU citizenship were to be redefined as modern, transnational, and inclusive, what obstacles do you see?
One problem is how the host society deals with the? immigrants’ complex loyalty structures. The problem with politics and society is that so many people still think that you have to give up your old identity when you come to Germany. This leads to broken biographies and weak and disloyal citizens. A strong identity, or, more precisely, an engaged citizenship should be able to fit with your own résumé. Those demanding immigrants to give up their cultural roots are on the wrong track. Unfortunately, that is the basic mentality in politics and society in many countries. Germany is not, to our disadvantage, a host society. Fears also increase as one has fewer concrete contacts.
What is your personal vision of a Europe of citizens?
I want to see a world of citizens, of people, who feel responsible for the community. But also responsible for the histories in the community, which are usually diverse. Europe for me is only as vibrant as the responsibility that citizens are ready to take on.
Tags: Interview