The ambitious process of achieving a supranational identity at European and global level represents a goal that cannot be seen in the short or medium term. Even under optimistic standards for a future with a consolidated global model or an even closer union in Europe, the idea of a supranational identity needs to be revised and adapted to current circumstances. Also in terms of emotions the citizenship is not prepared for “listening” to a project that demands loosing traditional sovereignty standards. Is it so, that is not the political momentum for a project that supposes resignation but for a one that delivers faster solutions to current global crises.
At European level the first step that should be taken -before getting to an even closer union- is a strong rapport with European citizens by giving them the correct tools to get engaged. Transmitting the idea that Europe is a safe place to live within a reliable leadership and transparent and solid institutions.
In crisis time in which the rise of nationalism is one of its most obvious signs, democratic mechanisms of citizenship empowerment should be the first goal and definitely the main strength for building a resilient society.
The defense of national sovereignty comes from reducing levels of uncertainty at all levels especially in terms of security and not from isolationism and defensive policies against integration. Is precisely the latest that will bring a safety framework to sustain current weak national political structures.
Last attacks in London and Paris makes of security a top priority and a responsibility for the entire global community. For which a reshape of national security forces in conjunction with joint action at European level are one of the steps needed for getting to an effective strategy against indiscriminate attacks. Indeed, type and shape of this attacks show that national strong structures and a change of foreign affairs focus should be the goal to become really solid and deliver stability in the short term. Its important to highlight that this kind of attacks as a difference to a “real war” is that there are meant to create fear within the citizens. Management of emotions should be the main goal that delivers sense of safety within a fast and effective action plan. Which also supposes a political communication strategy up to this challenges that print governments with a strong sense of reliability. A citizenship that feels support –even under threat- could make wiser decisions. To be under threat doesn’t mean to feel isolated. The physiological side of this emergency situation counts equally to tangible and immediate security responses and need to be taken in account seriously. In general terms the confusion generated by the attacks, the lack of effective preparation from security forces and a “hungry” media that is not able to give the news in the correct dimension results in more uncertainty and fear.
Supranational values are the basis for a global model of empowered citizenship within solid political pillars and resilient societies. In a world under threat, defensive attitudes expressed by isolationism are the response to fear. Is it here where we identify the role of emotions as a main factor that should not be underestimated because of its negative impact at the time to take faster and secure decisions. If we are immerse in a world in crises is not feasible to expect that the citizenship will give more value to supranational values rather than national defenses to immediate threats. Even within an integration framework, their priorities would be around join action of national sovereignties and not supranational values by the resignation of national powers.
Supranational values: this is not your political momentum. This is time for addressing crises under joint-action values in a global context within adaptation processes.
The future ahead……
*Miniature sculpture: Tanaka Tatsuya