Ireland on the tracks towards Lisbon

In a resent poll 54% of Irish voters said they would now vote in favour of the Lisbon Treaty, against 24% who said they would vote against. Might we actually get a new and sort-of proper Treaty in the EU soon? I dear not be confident but there's hope.

EU ban on snus is illiberal and illegal

I'm neither a smoker nor a snuser (user of snus), and only a moderate drinker. A few years ago when the Christian Democrat Dagfinn Høybråten, then Norwegian Minister for Health, introduced a law banning smoking in pubs and restaurants in Norway I applauded it, and I'm still a bit taken back when I come to countries where smoking indoors, in pubs and restaurants as well as in private homes, is not only completely legal but also common. Okay, so smoking in private homes is not outlawed in Norway, but it is becoming less and less commonplace. I think people should have the right to use substances that might hurt their health, such as tobacco and alcohol, as long as the use of these substances does not inflict harm on others. Which is why I support the ban on smoking in indoor public places. What I neither support nor understand, however, is the ban on substances that have practically no harmful effect on third parties and what's health risks are debatable. I am here talking of snus. Being very common in Sweden as well as Norway as an alternative to smoking, as the only external harm it inflicts is that the use of (old fashion) snus is not very aesthetically pleasing. Unlike cigarettes, snus does not give of smoke stuck on bystanders' clothes. Whether it causes cancer in the same way as regular tobacco is debatable. Nevertheless, albeit being completely legal in most Scandinavian countries, it has since 1989 been banned in the rest of the EU Inner Market. This inflicts not only with the basic freedom of movement of goods, as established in the Treaties, it also contradicts with the principle of mutual recognition, so famously established with the Cassis de Dijon case in 1979. Snus is a legal good according to Swedish health standards and should therefor be able to be legally sold in all countries members of the Internal Market. To forbid it is not only a paternalistic infringement of citizens right to make individual decision for their life, it is also a clear breach of basic Community law and ECJ jurisprudence, and the ban should thus be lifted.

The Radical Right as seen from Bruges

I'm sitting in a class on European parties discussing far-right movements in the European Parliament. Our Italian-Canadian colleague has given us an introduction into Alessandra Mussolini and her likes, and we're currently exploring voter behaviour and the over-representation of young, uneducated men amongst Mussolini's voters. Although her looks, she's a former Playmate, is a plausible argument for voting for her if you're 16 and hormonal, but at 25 it is no longer. Mussolini and her lot occupies around 8% of the seats in the 2004-2009 EP, and there's no reason to see them as a threat, although our Italian house-communist disagrees.

The voters we're talking about are not amongst my colleagues here in Bruges, nor did I meet them at the Hill in Bergen. Not comparing Frp with Mussolini, they are the closest we come in Norway to a right-wing populist party flirting with nationalism and xenophobia, you don't find anyone who will openly support them amongst the students at the Faculty of Social Sciences. The same is the case here. You don't study any form of social science and support a far-right wing party. It is just not acceptable. Being a blood-red communist believing in state-centrism, the dictatorship of the proletariat, so-called "democratic" or "social" ownership of the means of production is fully acceptable, but do not even dream about claiming that any for of right-wing authoritarianism could be desirable (unless you argue by quoting Plato and Machiavelli) or that Muslims and globalisation represents a threat to our society.

That being said, I have no problems with the far-right being seen and treated as pariahs. What bothers me in this respect is more that flirting with the far-left and claiming that the Communist Utopia is something we should strive for. Is it something we should have learned from the 20th Century, in particular here in Europe, it is that totalitarian ideologies, whether they be to the Right or the Left, promising Salvation and a Utopian future, represents exactly the opposite; any ideology that claims to present and represent the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth (so help me, God), who promises to set us free and pretends to be the way to something bigger, is in the end, whatever the good intentions, bound to bind us and lead us to serfdom.

I've gone off on a whim here, intending to focus on modern-day populist right-wing parties. It is a sad fact that while the far-right is being dominated by pulp, low-brow, angry young men, modernisation losers, under-educated unemployed victims of globalisation and modernisation, the contemporary radical left has the credibility of being represented by high-fly academics and other May-68 anachronisms, and low-educated voters on the left often vote moderately social-democratic. To specify, I am sorry for the fate of the former, but I am more scared by the choices of the latter.

The blessings of inter-state duty-free shopping

On my way home for Christmas I felt like doing my old man a favour and by him a bottle of Chivas Regal, his favourit whisky. In the airport shop the whisky shelf is filled with tempting goods, but no Chivas. I lift my head to see if there's more whisky to be found and in a distance, at the very far end of the liquor store at Brussels National Airport, hanging from the celing there's a sign with a Norwegian flag and a message stating, in Norwegian, that those flying to Norway still can enjoy duty-free shopping. Embarressed and with my head down in shame I walked over, picked up my father's whisky and got in line.
We're part of Schengen and we're part of the EU Inner Market, but we still have our own shelves at the airports equipped with big signs and arrows pointing us in the right direction.

The Lisbon Treaty moves on

Yesterday evening the Swedish parliament, Riksdagen, ratified the Lisbon Treaty, with the centre-right government coalition parties together with the Social Democrats voting in favour. It is not that long since the Irish population voted no in a referendum, but still the Swedish government decided not to put the process to a halt. I'm glad to see that responsible and euro-friendly governments haven't given up and hopefully we'll see a second, this time successfull, referendum in Ireland soon, so the Treaty may be implemented by January 1st 2010.

- The EU was not responsible for the post-war peace and prosperity in Western Europe

A century ago Alfred Nobel, when establishing a set of prices in his name, decided that the Peace Price should be decided by a Norwegian committee whose member where elected by the Norwegian parliament. Hundred-and-some years later Mr Torbjorn Jagland, amongst other things former Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs and currently Labour MP and President of the Parliament, is set to be the next leader of the Norwegian Nobel Committee. As Mr Jagland is a staunch supporter for Norwegian membership to the EU and has publicly stated that the EU, because of its role in preserving and consolidating peace in Europe after World War 2, deserves the Peace Price sparks have begun to fly within the Socialis Left Party (SV) and the No to EU-movement. Mr Heming Olaussen, leader of No to EU and former member of the Central Committee of SV, demands that anti-EU hard-liners are appointed from his party, as he fears that Mr Jagland, together with the majority of the committee, who are also pro-Europeans, will push through the price being given to the Beast from Brussels. He argues that crediting the EU for post-war peace in Western Europe has no more value than crediting NATO and that arguing that the peace between Germany and France was secured by the EU is to argue that two NATO-members would have attacked each other without the EU, which he sees as unthinkable. Mr Olaussen, together with large parts of the Norwegian far-left-wing intelligensia sees the EU as the Beast in Revelations, and giving credits this beast for anything is thus unthinkable. However, at times, even if they see the EU as the Beast and market liberation as the work of the Devil, it would be nice if they'd recognize the role the integration of the French and German coal- and steel industries played in the years of reconstruction. Is it unthinkable for two NATO-powers to go to war with one-another? Seeing first of all the centuries of conflicts and wars between France and Germany/the German states and secondly the everlasting conflicts between Turkey and Greece, beliving that NATO-membership is enough to make arch-enemies friendly towards each-other is overly optimistic. No, I'm afraid Mr Olaussen knows perfectly well the importance of European economic integration to the peace and prosperity in Western Europe, but that he takes every oppertunity he has to talk down on the European project.

Negociating, or the art of insulting politely

In these days norwegian negociators sit in Brussels face to face with their EU counterparts to renegociate the EEA-treaty that gives Norway (and other major EFTA-countries such as Iceland and Lichtenstein) access to the European inner market. Also today here in Bruges is a workshop in negociation skills organised by the College. Apart from the obvious one, what do these two events have in common? Allow me to put it like this: All english-native speakers or at native level were told they didn't have to participate. The workshop wasn't about negociation techniques, but about language, or in other words who to insult without being insulting, which is pretty much what goes on between the norwegian and EU negociators in Brussels. There the EU wants Norway to pay some extra billion euros a year into the EU financial chest, knowing very well that no matter what sum they may propose, even in these days, the money exists and Norway won't suffer, whilst the norwegians have to make it sound plausable that Norway pays enough already and that there are limits for a what is reasonable to ask for. To summerize, the EU negociators have to tell the norwegians that they're not showing solidarity with the poor eastern-european countries and that they're nothing but a bunch of over-wealthy hillbillies that where soo lucky that they happened to find oil, whilst the norwegians have to explain that the people on the Continent have themselves to thank and that eastern Europe's poverty is non of our responsibility. And whilst doing this, both parties have to remain polite. Hence, the art of negociating.

Norwegian cabinet minister threatens to veto Bolkestein

Ms Liv Signe Navarsete, leader of the Norwegian agrarian Centre Party and cabinet minister in Norway's centre-left government, threatens to use Norway's veto power against the Bolkestein directive. Apparently meassures that would make it easier for businesses to survive and for workers to find jobs are not what we need at this point in the middle of the financial crisis. The fear of so-called social dumping and the threat of the Polish plumber are too big. However, Mr Jonas Gahr Store (Labour), the Minister of foreign affairs, is a fairly wise man who understands the implications of Norway refusing to implement the aqui communautaire, so it'll probably be with the big words from Ms Navarsete. Nevertheless, why not veto and see what happenes? If the EU is clever they'll severly sanction Norway and the Norwegian population will finally understand the implications of being on the outside.

The financal crises as we experience it in Bruges

We read about the financial crisis here, we discuss it, we laugh about it, and between us the Norvegians we joke about buying Iceland, but all in all it doesn't have much of an inpact on our lifes. That is, it didn't until last week. Last week we were supposed to have the grand opening here at the college, with prominent guests including ambassadors, ministers and not at least the German chancelor Angela Merkel as our opening speaker. Those who have an acceptable amount of understanding of international politics know that Germany is a fairly important country, especially when it comes to European economics, and that the German chancellor has a bit of a saying in Germany. With this as our foundations, we all looked forward to listen to Ms Merkel holding the opening speech. Alas, our optimism was ruined. On Tuesday morning, as we enjoyed a cup of coffee between our readings, the message came that the opening the same night was cancelled. Reason: Ms Merkel had to attend an extra-ordinary session in the Bundestag because of the crisis. Jean Monnet, François Mitterand, Juan Carlos, Jaque Delors, Margeret Thatcher, they are but a few of the prominent personalities who have held the opening speech, but Angela Merkel, because the Dow Jones, the CAC 40 and the DAX all fell a few points, decided to prioritize German domestic politicians over the future leaders in Brussels. I guess that's the price we pay for being otherwise untouched. However, Ms Merkel, 20 years from now, it's payback time, and it's your country who'll pay.