Interview: Hope for a united Europe
and why he thinks increasing the EU's powers is a good idea.
Jon Young: Why do you think Europe lacks a spirit of unity?
Philippe Cayla: I think, unfortunately, there is an outbreak of nationalism at this time. There is a lot of skepticism about Europe, which is paradoxical because Europe is a success story and people have very quickly become accustomed to the idea that [the European Union] exists, which is a kind of miracle, I think.
You have previously blamed a lack of pan-European media coverage in Europe for the continent's lack of unity. At the same time, a large percentage of US news coverage is still locally focused
Yes, but there's a big difference between Europe and the States. Let me illustrate this with two examples: In 2004, the inauguration of the Airbus 380 was held in Toulouse. It was a rather glorious moment for the European airline industry and there were four heads of state present from the four major countries involved in making the plane. There were also three commissioners from the European Union present. The four heads of state spoke, but no one from the commission spoke. It was incredible. Can you imagine if Boeing was launching a new airplane in the US and President Bush didn't speak?
The second example is the 60th anniversary of the liberation of the Auschwitz concentration camp which took place a few years ago. I remember there were many people invited, many people spoke but no one from the European Union, no one representing the European Parliament. This was incredible because, after all, the EU was created after the Second World War in order to bring peace to the continent, while Auschwitz is a symbol of what should never be allowed to happen again in Europe. And nobody from the European Union was there. Again, if this were the US, you would have the US President present. I think these kinds of examples show that we are lacking prominent figures to represent Europe as an idea.
The European Union has showed that it is still not able to find a single voice, even with such crises as the recent trouble in Tibet. How can Europeans unite behind such a fragmented union?
Foreign policy needs a single focus, I think the new official for foreign affairs might try to change things, to have more common policies for foreign issues. But frankly speaking, foreign policy is the most difficult thing to put together, because major nations - who have their own traditional diplomatic relations - don't want to give up their power.
So this is the aspect of the European Union that takes the most time [to develop], but I think there is something important happening right now - the ambassador of the European Union. He will gain more power next year as he will be connected with higher representatives of the European Union and, most importantly, he has money, because the European Union has money.
When you go to African countries or Asian countries ... the other ambassadors have no money because they are poor now, they are in a crisis in each country - the French, the Germans, the Dutch, the British - they are poorer than the ambassador for the European Union. And so the ambassador for the European Union has more power with the local authorities because the one who has the money has the power.
Do you see any progress in the development of the European Union?
There are a lot of things happening - we are waiting for the new treaty to enter into force, of course. The fact that we are going to have a real president, a permanent president of the continent, will be a particular achievement I think. A prominent representative for foreign affairs, I think, will change the face of Europe, especially in the eyes of the rest of the world.
And in politics you need key faces. Without the president, people won't become accustomed with a [European executive branch]. I think the president will be a more representative and recognizable figure than those we have now. Today we have commissioners, we have member of the European Parliament, but we have no real leader in fact. An EU president will be a real leader and will change the face of Europe.
As Europe moves toward a more federal system, how far will it differ from the US?
I think intellectually we are close, because we are of the same culture. Economically we are also close, but socially there is a gap because the US is a country which gives more to creativity, to entrepreneurship. Everybody has to make his way and support his own life, without much of a social parachute. Whereas in Europe, everybody wants to be protected first. This is the result of history, but it can be changed of course. There is a lack of entrepreneurship in Europe.
There is, what I fear most, a lack of capacity in research. My main concern is that in R&D we are losing ground against the US, because US universities are attracting the best people in the world. We are losing our brains, in fact, the brain drain is really gaining ground and I think it is a major concern for Europe. Maybe more so than entrepreneurship - that can be revitalized if you have some incentives, but if you lose the best brains they are lost forever. The solution is to increase funding for research and raise researchers' salaries. The universities in Europe are also poor compared to those in the US.
