Home page > Opinion > I Want my Future Back

I Want my Future Back

An Accusation of the Leading Politicians in Europe

, by Vincent Venus

All the versions of this article: [Deutsch] [English]

"Smile together, lead alone." Vincent Venus accusess the European leaders of a lack of common vision. – European Council meeting 23 October 2011; Credit “The Council of the European Union”


  • federal secretary of JEF Germany | former editor-in-chief of the German edition (2010 - 2013) | M.A. European Public Affairs; B.A. European Studies, Maastricht University | Expertise: EU Foreign Policy, political communications

    Twitter :

I am angry. I am angry because the current generation of politicians is betraying my generation. How do I arrive at this conclusion? Let me go back a bit in history before I address the current situation.

Two Generations of Great Leadership

I was born in 1989, just some days before the Berlin wall came down. This event allowed the unification of Germany and ultimately of Europe. It was achieved by the people and by politicians. The latter did what they thought needed to be done, despite of not being sure of the consequences of their decisions. They were brave and my generation owes them a lot.

40 years beforehand there was another generation of politicians. They found a European continent burned to ashes, inhabited by people who fought against each other with no mercy. Instead of allowing national resentments to dominate the after-war years they decided to build up our continent and made the different nations cooperate instead of compete. They, most notably Monnet, were far-sighted, and again, my generation owes them a lot.

What do those two generations of leaders have in common? They both faced times of unrest and uncertainty. However, they were visionary and took risks to achieve their ideas, despite of a possible loss of personal power in case of failure. It is these two characteristics which I miss in the politicians who currently wield power.

Europe today: Crisis and no Vision

Europe is in a terrible state. We are witnessing rising unemployment, social upheaval, states crushed by market pressure, and most striking of all: mistrust. The markets do not trust the states, the states do not trust the banks, foreign countries do not trust the European Union and the people do not trust any of the above.

Of course the top politicians are not entirely responsible for this crisis and of course there are events beyond their control. Nevertheless, it is astounding how obvious they neglect their responsibility to lead, or rather, lead together. Some examples: President Sarkozy first tried everything to prevent French banks from taking over responsibility and is now already campaigning for the upcoming national elections. Chancellor Merkel is no better. In May she told the fairy tale of the lazy Greeks, in July she called for a “controllable process” and dismissed any bold steps, and in October she reassured to protect German tax-payers’ money – meanwhile demanding bigger sacrifices by the Greek people. Papandreou on the other hand decided to let the people speak but did so in a poorly timed manner and without any consultation. And Cameron? Well, he is simply getting on the nerves of everybody.

Thus the leaders of the nation-states are failing but what about those of the European Union? They try but it seems they are almost negligible in light of the Member States’ power play. Barroso argues for a new treaty, Van Rompuy is busy mediating between the Euro-zone members and the others, and the European Parliament has to witness how the intergovernmental actors are unable to reach consensus. The European Union is so far the biggest loser of this crisis – and this is precisely the worst failure of this generation of politicians.

Instead of proclaiming the EU as the way to overcome this crisis they do much to undermine the Union. As Martin Schultz (S&D) rightfully noticed: “In the EU, success is nationalised and failure is Europeanised.” Scholars of EU studies arrived at this conclusion already some years ago but today it is even more true than ever. Simply read the angry comments below any online newspaper article regarding the EU to see the result of this tactic.

It is almost ridiculous to come up with the following metaphor but just too many leading figures seem to have forgotten it: We all sit in the same boat (Europe), we all sail on the same ocean (planet earth), and we all have the same destination (peace, social cohesion, a free and enlightened society, quality of life, global cooperation to tackle the problems – the “European Dream” as Rifkin calls it). Just because some of our fellow seamen from Greece are temporarily too weak to do their duty on deck, this does not mean that we can simply throw them overboard. Europe, united in good and in bad times – and especially in future times. Next to those problems mentioned above, what about climate change, the failed integration of non-Europeans, the demographic change, energy security or the relative loss of influence of us Europeans on world stage? Do the national leaders really believe they are able to tackle these challenges on their own?

Power requires taking over Responsibility

Being in power equals taking over responsibility – everyone who was a student representative knows that. The European leaders in contrast, seem to have forgotten this. They stumble from one economic crisis to another, do not tackle other elementary problems, but seem to only administer the disaster.

Why is this the case? First of all, because of selfish power concerns. They prefer to be a big fish in a small waters, rather than to be a small fish in big waters. Secondly, because of the influence of multinational companies and banks on the politicians. Consequently, they try to appease the national electorate as well as the markets. The first group with short-sighted decisions, which will harm Europe in the long-run but keep them in power, and the second by avoiding the harsh but necessary reforms.

That is the wrong approach. In my eyes a politician should present her/his plan to the people, elaborate on the pros and cons and then ask the electorate if they want to follow her/him. This way contains of course the risk of not getting elected, but it provides orientation to the people. Orientation leads to trust, a feeling so bitterly needed in times like ours.

I can only hope that my generation does it better. We are equipped: educated at much more demanding universities, transnationally orientated thanks to English and Erasmus, and connected via the internet. Of course, this only applies to a certain share of my generation, but if this share is ready to face the challenge, we can and we will get our future back.

Share this article


This article was first published on the blog of the 2011 Dahrendorf Symposium. The symposium will address major challenges facing Europe. Our German edition is media partner of the event.

Your comments

  • On 22 April 2012 at 16:29, by Iwantout Replying to: I Want my Future Back

    Of course it could always be that the ‘leaders’ have to reflect the will of their populations if only to stay in power. Thus Chancellor Merkel has to be highly sensitive about German taxpayers, President Sarkozy about the perceived importance of French influence, Prime Minister Cameron about rampant eurosceptism etc.

    Increasingly the people of the varying countries are realising that the EU construct is not answerable to their wishes but to a tiny non representative elite. Additionally the majority view of the mass of people in any one country is often in fundamental conflict with those equally passionately held views in another country. Why would anyone who reads history believe that there is actually a ‘correct’ view, to even suggest there is one is, I would submit, arrogant.

    If I may illustrate from a contradiction held within your own text; “The latter (politicians) did what they thought needed to be done, despite of not being sure of the consequences of their decisions.” Three paragraphs later we have, “Europe is in a terrible state. We are witnessing rising unemployment, social upheaval, states crushed by market pressure.” I would suggest that the second quote identifies the result of not being sure of the consequence of your decisions but going ahead regardless, so much for the vision of the leaders that have gone before.

    I would agree absolutely with “In my eyes a politician should present her/his plan to the people, elaborate on the pros and cons and then ask the electorate if they want to follow her/him.” The difficulty with this of course is that historically the peoples of Europe when asked their views roundly reject EU plans, but they are ignored and told to try again. (Always assuming that the national leader who has the temerity to suggest this is not replaced overnight by the EU ie Prime Minister Papandreou)

    National politicians themselves are not usually prepared to even take the chance, as evidence I would simply point to the steadfast refusal of UK politicians of any party to put EU membership to a UK vote, (The 1975 UK referendum related to membership of the EEC) regardless of previous promises.

    The result is, as you say, national politicians who have their own agendas and a terror of actually asking the people what they want for fear of the answer.

Reply to this article


Warning, your message will only be displayed after it has been checked and approved.

Who are you?

To show your avatar with your message, register it first on gravatar.com (free et painless) and don’t forget to indicate your Email addresse here.

Enter your comment here
  • This form accepts SPIP shortcuts [->urls] {{bold}} {italics} <quotes> <code> and HTML code <q> <del> <ins>. To create paragraphs, just leave empty lines.

Follow the comments: RSS 2.0 | Atom