Report by Peter Alberts (Bündnis 90/Die Grünen) and Greet Goverde(GroenLinks)

I Three Promising Plans

The Tour spots and promotes local events and initiatives in which Greens from two or more countries are involved. The events highlight local issues with a cross border dimension to show the public that Europe starts at your doorstep and local and European solutions often are complementary. Whenever necessary, a Heerlen coordination team helps to establish contacts, identify campaign issues and get publicity. Its volunteers may participate in the event and put the key information & the report online on www.greenyourope.net/crossborder. The site also is the main internal communications tool, through its forum on which participants and others can leave suggestions and comments.

Schelde/Rhine: a New Harbour Deal

A shift of paradigms offers the Green New Deal for the Schelde-Rhine Delta. In this document, to be published in early Spring, Green councillors from the region propose to stop the seemingly limitless expansion of the portal zones of Rotterdam, Antwerp, Zeebrugge and Terneuzen by replacing competition by cooperation and shifting towards more local production to avoid unnecessary transport.They suggest to use existing rail, road and water infrastructures more efficiently to limit new megaprojects – like the Iron Rhine and to gradually replace container transshipment by high quality jobs, preferably in sustainable sectors.

A proof that their alternative is feasible is given by the harbours of Gent and Terneuzen that cooperate in an ambitious recycling project. Because the harbour initiative could pave the way for tougher EU rules, the plans might be accompanied by several joint Flemish-Dutch actions during the European elections campaign.  

Iron Curtain Trail: soft tourism landmark

Author of this 6.800 km long cycleable trail along the former borders between East and West Europe is the German member of the European Parliament Michael Cramer. His trail serves a double purpose: preserving remnants of the wall as memorials for history, and creating a soft tourism and nature trail stretching from the Barentz Sea to the Black Sea.

The initiative, partly adopted by the Parliament in 2005 as part of a sustainable tourism directive, will be the background of a series of Green election events actions during the European elections campaign, just as it was in 2004. Thus Greens from Germany and neigbouring countries will show the public how the EU can turn borders into bridges. Cramer won’t try to have the entire trail cycled, but will ask sets of groups from adjacent countries to each cycle some 25 km on a given day, starting in the south in Spring and moving north.

Zero Carbon Caravan: far-going demand

The Caravan, conceived by Chris Keene from Norwich, delivers a clear demand: ‘a zero carbon world as fast as we can!‘. It does so by travelling zero carbon itself, from somewhere in England or Wales (the Centre for Alternative technology www.cat.org ) to the Continent. And it stops wherever it will be invited to co-organise zero carbon conferences and concerts with ‘most of the power provided by audience participation‘.

The European elections offer only one opportunity; the Caravan’s main target is the UN Climate Summit in Copenhagen at the end of this year. Keene’s plan is to travel by bike or any other means of transport that does not emit CO2, be it a horse-drawn wagon or sailing boat, solar vehicle or skates. Additional sugggestions: a solar ship visiting harbours and for land transport help from the Delft University department specialising in solar cars.

For the moment Chris is still a lone traveller – anybody who wishes to join him part of the trip, host an event or offer a way to cross the Channel without emitting CO2 please mail to chris.keene@zerocarboncaravan.net. See also www.zerocarboncaravan.net. Ideally the start would be on Spring equinox (March 21st), with as a first big stopover the EGP elections conference from 27-29 March in Brussels.  For zero carbon solutions see www.capanddividend.org, http://www.ecoequity.org

II. Practical Campaigning

The Obama experience

Rasmus Andresen, a Danish member of Bündnis 90/Die Grünen participated in Obama’s campaign in Columbus (Ohio). Obama’s success, he says, partly depended on thousand’s of volunteers canvassing door to door and phoning people from local offices, doing pep-talks and focussing on people who hadn’t yet made up their minds. Successful canvassers also brought more campaigners aboard. His european background gave Andresen an extra bonus, whereas he was hosted by an American couple happy to help the campaign in this way.

Would this campaigning method work in Europe? In England definitely. Participants from Brighton said they ‘already are phoning and knocking on doors to see our candidate MP Caroline Lucas (now an MEP) elected as the first ever Green Member of the British Parliament’. German Greens proved more sceptical, stating that one of their candidates got worse results ‘because people didn’t like such American methods’.

Iron Curtain Trail & Zero Carbon Caravan

Both initiatives involve a chain of events that form a chain both in space and time. But the Iron Curtain events are not necessarily linked by actual cycling, and therefore easier to organise. And the events are the most important part, whereas the Zero Carbon Caravan also might draw publicity by its way of travelling zero carbon. To get campaign events organised, the Caravan – and the Cross Border Tour as a whole – might profit from the Iron Curtain format used in 2004 campaign:

• spot an issue, a location and local Green groups interested in co-organising an event
• issue a first press release to find more local people to organise the activity
• issue a second press release to announce the event to public and press, making sure the message is received. And, suggested by the audience & Green and Social:
• persuade ngo’s active on a campaign issue to participate. Like Transition Towns (Zero Carbon Caravan).

Brussels, 13 December - Anti-speculation taxes far higher than the good-old Tobin tax are needed to re-stabilise the financial system,said economist Alfred Kleinknecht and former Attac-leader Sven Giegold during the second debate on the financial crisis of the 7th annual Heerlen conference. But whereas Giegold, co-author of his parties’ crisis remedy ‘The Green New Deal’ proposed a range of measures to recreate the system, Kleinknecht suggested to leave that sort of reparation jobs to the right. The left, he said, should concentrate on changing one of the major causes of the instability: the way companies are run.

Report by Michael Leibman

For prof. Alfred Kleinknecht, who teaches economy of the innovation in Delft (Nl) and Paris, one of the problems leading to the financial crisis were the rating agencies that ratified financial ‘products’ much too optimistic. They acted on behalf of the financial firms selling the products, he said, not on behalf of the buyers, and because they have to compete with one another for clients and therefore tend to be accommodating towards them, and because they are paid a percentage of the value of the products they rate. To get objective evaluations, ratings should be performed by independent state agencies.

Another factor, Kleinknecht said, is the role of new financial tools in amplifying economic cycles, like leveraged buy-outs:  A firm X with a need in working capital of 100 000, that finances this need entirely with its own money and makes a profit of 10 000, yields a return on that money, equity, of 10%.’ Nowadays, there are more glamorous ways of running that firm. If an equity firm would buy out this firm by investing 5 000 in equity and borrowing the remaining 95 000 from banks at a 4% interest rate, the firm could, with the same profit of 10 000, pay back the 3800 in interest to the banks and retain the remaining 6 200. The return on equity would now be 6200 / 5000 x 100 = 124 %.’

Turbo effect

‘Now, that’s quite a bit more attractive. And given good cash flows in the firms being bought out, it is certainly the kind of incentive needed to feed bank borrowing. On the other hand, if such a firm begins to falter and to make losses, leverage buy-outs have a dangerous turbo-effect. If the firm in our example makes a loss of 10 000, the Return on Equity becomes minus 10.000 ‘negative profit’ plus a negative interest of 3.800, which totals minus 276%. So leverage buy-outs certainly reinforce economic downturns.’

‘Similar risky leverages exist in other areas. Assets, like houses, art objects, office space, shares and bonds, can be acquired through borrowing. As long as credit expansion takes place, there is high demand for assets and therefore asset prices rise. As long as the value increase of assets is larger than the interest rate on your loan, you get rich while sleeping. As soon as asset prices begin going down, a downward spiral starts: bank loans are withdrawn, which forces the sale of assets, so asset prices go down further, then more banks get nervous and withdraw credit; this causes more forced sales, and the spiral continues. So it is obvious that the turbo effect of leveraged financing creates high instability in financial markets.’

Panic sales

There is no certainty today on the size of the bubble of such over-valued assets on the volume of leveraged financing, on the sharpness of the various leverages. Nor can we predict how patient banks are likely to be with their struggling clients. Will they force their clients to sell more assets or help them until a general recovery occurs? We do not know if the worst is behind or before us. Areas of uncertainty include the possibility of a collapse of asset prices due to panic sales, the impact of lower asset values on consumer spending. Will there be more bankruptcies of banks, insurance companies, high-leveraged hedge funds or private equity firms?

Could domino effects occur? And what about banks that are too big to fail, so the government needs to save them, and too big to save, because the government can’t afford to save them? Their chance of bankruptcy is perhaps small, but if that happens, then what?

Marx’s Capital‘s selling again

How should the left respond to the current problems? It should, says Keinknecht, not exhaust itself in technocratic regulation discussions. ‘The right should come with the solutions  to the problems it has generated. After all the right is on the defensive, as the crisis is leading to a change in the political climate. To give just one example: Marx’s Capital is selling again.’

‘Nonetheless, the left should think about a system of anti-speculation taxes that is more far-reaching than just the Tobin tax. It should also be wary of a new credit crisis, which may be building up in the Euro-zone. But more importantly, the left must address the issue of corporate governance. As things stand today, firms suffer from short-termism and opportunistic behaviour everywhere. Shareholders do not “hold” shares, but tend to just buy and sell them. With diffused ownership of shares, the ‘principal-agent’ problem becomes tremendous: shareholders no longer use their power to impose discipline and long-term strategies on the management. Managers maximize individual benefits – après moi le déluge – and hedge funds and private equity firms play pyramid games.

Educated worker

In that context, the only ones that still care about the long-term continuity of firms and jobs, the only party that has a vital interest in it are its employees. Therefore, they should nominate half of the Board of Directors, and have rights to veto basic decisions about out-sourcing, mergers etc. They are capable of it: the modern, highly educated workers should not be subjected to an authoritarian 19^th century top-down management system like they are now.

Giegold: General crisis requires holistic answers.

Attac founder, tax-specialist, and Green candidate-candidate for the Europarliament for Bündnis 90/Die Grünen Sven Giegold, analyses the crisis from a broader perspective. We are not merely talking about a financial crisis, he says, but about a more general crisis involving climate change, the overuse of natural resources and a growing gap between rich and poor, both within nations and internationally. For this general crisis we must find holistic answers. The failure of the Poznan climate conference, the wrecking of the European climate package and the distorted character of European integration all point to the failure of neo-liberal ideology and to the need for us to provide our answers not just in the financial area but in other areas as well.

There is a major problem, not just in the financial sphere but in the real economy as well. The various plans to remedy the crisis have so far proved inadequate. There is mounting pressure for more intervention, but the hundreds of billions spent up to now will only subsidize the old economy rather than giving the needed push to the new “green” economy.

Redistribute wealth

We must demand a New Deal. The sectors that should grow remain to be clearly defined and subsidised, but we can assert that among the main ones are health, education, environmental technology and renewable energy. Subsidising the car industry is not a valid proposition unless deep-going measures are taken to moderate car use and make products with more sustainable life cycles. We also need to institute mechanism for effective and long lasting redistribution of wealth between North and South and for re-regulating financial markets.

The crisis may have terrible impacts, but it also represents an opportunity for positive change. Major change occurs only at specific moments in history. We normally think of past revolutions, of the New Deal and of post World War II as belonging to that kind of upheaval. The current crisis represents a historical de-legitimisation of the ideology of neo-liberalism. Significantly, not only such an organization as Greenpeace but also various UN agencies and the Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon himself have taken up the call for a Green New Deal. Of course, we are just in the initial phase of this ideological upheaval, which will require much work and coordination.

Euro zone split

The Green candidate also discusses in more details points he had been working on with ATTAC Germany in recent years, like taxation on financial transactions, regulation of the level of capitalization in firms of the financial sector, the need to close down tax havens, the need for an international currency. And he points out that the euro zone is running the risk of a major split because of a lack of coordination in economic policies.

Regarding taxation, for Giegold something further reaching is needed than the Tobin Tax – the small taxation on crossborder capital movements Attac has been promoting since the 90′s. ‘In fact different sorts of capital movements should be subject to taxation. The rate of taxation should be higher if the investment is more speculative in nature, and some forms of speculation should simply be outlawed.

Secondly, deep crises always involve excessive lending and insufficient levels of real assets in the financial sector. Measures need to be taken to insure that all lending firms have sufficient reserves in equity and deposits. Roosevelt’s New Deal separated financial banking from commercial banking. With the loosening of regulation and the development of new institutions and products, these separations have broken down; they need to be rebuilt and modernised. All these financial institutions and their innovative products must come under state scrutiny.

Independent international currency

‘Thirdly, time has come to shut down tax havens. These drain away taxation revenue from national budgets and economies and encourage speculative and illegal activity. We cannot expect a general international agreement on the subject. The European Union must act unilaterally on the basis of article 58 of the EC treaty, and build a coalition of countries who agree on basic rules and are determined to enforce them.

Stronger cooperation is also needed among member states. Some financial market experts are already speculating on the notion that some countries might, at some point, pull out of the Euro and a 1 percent difference in interest rates has appeared between Greece and other European countries. This trend must be countered. And finally, Keynes’ projects for more international economic cooperation and his advocacy of a common currency, independent of national ones, is drawing renewed interest. It is clear that there is a discrepancy between markets, which are worldwide, and regulation, which remains predominantly national in scope.

Some interesting Green New Deals

• Bündnis 90/Die Grünen
• New Economics Foundation & Caroline Lucas (chair Green Paarty of England & Wales)  

Experts and green politicians will speak about different issues: the economic situation, the position of the Taliban, and the possible role of Germany in this conflict.

If you wish to participate mail to Veronika Hentschel: hentschel@gruene-nrw.de

More information: the complete program (in german)

Grüner Ratschlag Afghanistan

Programm (vorläufig):   Stand 22.8.07 , 12:46

Sonntag, den 02.09.2007 in der Auslandsgesellschaft Nordrhein-Westfalen e.V., Steinstrasse 48, 44147 Dortmund

13:00

Grußwort - Arndt Klocke (Landesvorsitzender Grüne NRW)

13:10 Uhr

Warum wenden sich die Menschen den Taliban zu ?

Ulrich Fischer, Vorsitzender der Internationalen Helsinki Föderation für Menschenrechte, Wien

Kerstin Müller MdB, Bündnis 90 / Die Grünen , Staatsministerin a.D.
Moderation: Dr. Diana Siebert, Sprecherin LAG Europa, Frieden, Internationales Grüne NRW

 

Als die Taliban seit 1994 von Pakistan aus Afghanistan nach und nach bis zu 90% Afghanistans  eroberten, galten sie Beobachtern als der afghanischen Kultur Fremde. Aber ohne – freiwillige oder unfreiwillige – Unterstützung aus der Bevölkerung könnten auch heute wieder die Taliban keinen Boden gewinnen. Warum also wenden sich Menschen den Taliban zu?

Weil die Taliban unter Drohungen für Leib und Leben dazu gezwungen haben? Weil sie unter den Warlords, von denen ja so einige im Parlament sitzen, noch mehr gelitten haben oder diese zumindest keine Alternative darstellen? Weil “die Amis” in ihrer großkotzigen Besatzerart als bekämpfenswert gelten? Weil sie grundsätzlich gegen ausländische Truppen sind? Weil es ihnen unter den Taliban materiell besser geht? Oder weil die Menschen die verabscheuungswürdigen “kulturellen” Werte der Taliban und die von ihnen vorgesehene untergeordnete Rolle der Frauen wirklich schätzen?

Haben die Taliban noch dieselbe Ideologie, denselben Politikstil und dasselbe Durchschnittsalter wie vor zehn Jahren? Was sagen die Taliban in ihren Radiostationen? Wer sind “die Taliban” überhaupt?

14:10 Uhr

Mohnokultur ? – Ressourcen, Wirtschaft und Finanzen im fünftärmsten Land der Erde

Filmvorführung

Uwe und Astrid Sauermann, JournalistInnen, haben kürzlich Afghanistan bereist und Filmmaterial zum Mohnanbau gedreht

Ute Koczy MdB, Bündnis 90 / Die Grünen
Moderation: Stephan Hense, Sprecher LAG Europa, Frieden, Internationales Grüne NRW

Wenn die Waffen sprechen oder zu sprechen drohen, bleiben oft die wirtschaftlichen und geldlichen Mechanismen unbeachtet. Wie finanziert sich der afghanische Staat und seine Verwaltung eigentlich? Und wie finanzieren sich die Taliban oder Kriegsherren wie Hekmatyar?

Am Anbau von Opium (90% der Weltproduktion) verdienen mehr oder weniger alle politisch-militärischen Kräfte. Andererseits bauen nicht mehr als 25% der Bauern Opium an. Ist der großflächige Aufkauf der Mohnproduktion die Lösung? Wovon kann frau und man in Afghanistan sonst noch eigentlich leben? Ist Afghanistan 5 Jahre nach Ende des Flächenkriegs noch eine Kriegsökonomie?

15:10 – Pause mit Imbiss
gleichzeitig: Fotoserie von Cornelia Brinkmann über Peace-Building-Training in Badakhshan

15:30 Uhr

3. Der zivile Aufbau – wie machen?

Barbara Unmüßig - Vorstand Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung (Berlin/Kabul)

Selmin Çalıs¸kan - Medica Mondiale (Köln)

Peter Adler mit Nasir Nizary, Projektleiter in Charikar (Provinz Parwan)

– Deutsch-Afghanische Initiative Freiburg

Cornelia Brinkmann, friedenspolitische Beraterin, Ziviler Friedensdienst-Projekt für DED in Provinz Badakhshan.

Moderation: Sven Lehmann, Landesvorstand Grüne NRW

Wie kann angesichts dieser Lage der von außen initiierte und gestützte zivile Aufbau vonstatten gehen? Warum hat Präsident Karsai die Aufbauprogramme kritisiert? Sind sie effektiv oder wenigstens zielführend? Wie ist das Verhältnis von Input zu Output? Kann es ein Mehr an zivilem Aufbau ohne ein Mehr an Militär geben, und wenn ja, wie? Sollen angesichts der gegenwärtigen fragilen afghanischen Staatlichkeit Aufbau- und Hilfsprogramme über den – zu stärkenden – Staat, oder im Gegenteil gerade am – korrupten – Staat vorbei ausgeführt werden? Lässt es sich vermeiden, dass über die Hälfte der Gelder für die Verwaltung der ausländischen Organisationen und ihrer BeraterInnen selbst verbraucht wird? Sollen die ausländischen, darunter die deutschen Mittel für Afghanistan aufgestockt werden? Gibt es Best-Practice-Lösungen? Unter welchen Bedingungen gibt es Erfolge, unter welchen Misserfolge beim zivilen Aufbau? Wo müssen grundsätzlich Abstriche hinsichtlich erwarteter Erfolge gemacht werden?

16:30

4. Abschlussdebatte: Grüne im Dialog
Von sauberen und schmutzigen Lösungen.

Wie weiter mit Afghanistan? „Raußer oder Reiner“?

Citha Maaß - Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik

Winfried Nachtwei MdB , Bündnis 90 / Die Grünen

Ulrich Fischer, Vorsitzender der Internationalen Helsinki Föderation für Menschenrechte, Wien
Claudia Roth, Bundesvorsitzende Bündnis 90 / Die Grünen

Moderation: Daniela Schneckenburger, Landesvorsitzende Bündnis 90 / Die Grünen  NRW

“Militärisch kann dieser Krieg nicht gewonnen werden.” Was für ein Krieg ist das denn? Welche Rolle spielt die Wirtschaft, welche die Ideologien? Kann mehr Militär mehr Sicherheit bieten und die UN-Resolution erfüllen, die ja die Grundlage für die außenpolitischen Truppen sind?

Längst gibt es Verhandlungen nicht nur mit “gemäßigten”, sondern auch mit den “richtigen” Taliban. Ist eine undemokratische, die Frauenrechte missachtende, “saudi-arabische” Lösung für Afghanistan um den Frieden willen akzeptabel? Oder soll an Demokratie, insbesondere Frauenrechten festgehalten werden, wie es – bei gleichzeitig gültiger Scharia – in der Verfassung von 2004 festgelegt ist? Aber wie soll das mit einem Parlament geschaffen werden, in dem die wenigsten Demokraten, aber nicht wenige Ex-Warlords sind?

Und schließlich natürlich: soll dies alles mit mehr oder weniger ausländischen Soldaten versucht werden zu erreichen?

OrganisatorInnen:

Diana Siebert, Köln, gruene@diana-siebert.de, Tel.: 0221 / 972 78 88, 0178 / 322 70 05

Stephan Hense, Münster, stephan-hense@gmx.de

Peter Alberts, Münster, alberts@gruene-muenster.de, 0251 / 248 92 39
Veronika Hentschel hentschel@gruene-nrw.de , LGS

Zur besseren Planung ist eine Anmeldung zum Ratschlag erwünscht unter  hentschel@gruene-nrw.de. [oder gruene@diana-siebert.de ?] . Nach der Anmeldung werden auf Wunsch Fakten und Daten  über die PodiumsteilnehmerInnen und ihre Projekte zugesandt.

 BELGIUM, A TEST TUBE FOR EUROPE - draft programme
  

For the first time we propose a central theme, to which all workshops and debates are somehow related. Belgium as a test tube for Europe has been chosen because the local parties, Écolo and Groen!, like it, because an opening debate on it might draw a local audience and local (and European) press, and because it allows us, grassroot Greens, to discuss cross border issues at a very tangible level: you could see Belgium as a mini-Europe, an attempt to let three linguistic/cultural communities live together in peace. A project which is, like the European Union, subject to growing criticism.

It is still a proposal - so don’t hesitate to give your comments! Georg Schedereit, Lin Tabak, Luc Lamote, Marianne Saenen, Michael Stimson, Michel Mosser, Peter Alberts

Programme 

Friday 16

• 20.00:  Welcome, introduction : short intro of who we are, why we organise this event and what we hope to achieve with it.  
  Belgium, a test tube for Europe. Plenary debate on Belgium as a multi-lingual multi-cultural democratic structure, the problems and solutions and the lessons to be drawn for the EU. Suggested panellists: Prof. Philippe van Parijs (political scientist Louvain-la-Neuve), Prof. Kalypso Nikolaidis (Oxford University, Paris) and/or X. Pochet, Geert van Istendael…. Open to public and press. 
  Drink in town.

Saturday 17

• 09.00: Registration, opening.
  Introduction Heerlen project, explication of why we organise this meeting and what we hope to achieve with it: To bring Europe into our living room – and the living room to Europe, followed by short debate
• 09.30-11.00:  Collective versus individual identity: a re-evaluation.
  Not only in Belgium identity (ethnic, national, linguistic, religious etc. is at the core of the debate. Whereas the British are splitting up in Scots, Welsh, English and Irish, France’s new president Sarkozy has created a Ministry for national identity.
• 11.30-13.00:  Saving Europe from demagogy & populism – in search of (local) best practices. 
  Talking the language of the people is all right, telling them what they want to hear in order to get votes and power – like the Vlaams Belang does, isn’t. Not for Greens anyway, whose message is not always very popular on the short term. How do they nevertheless manage to get enough support? This is not a debate of ideas- we already have had many, but a quest for practical examples. Anyone who knows of successful ones, no matter the scale, is hereby invited to bring them forward. 

Lunch

• 14.30-16.00: Does Europe need Europeanism? Do we need a European identity to be an alternative to nationalisms? An inter-active personal approach, starting with a short video about Europeans from different countries talking about their identities in their own language as an introduction, followed by participants interviewing each other. asking each other the same question.
• 16.30-18.00: Sustainably linking Europeans- cross border public & environmentally friendly transport.
  Best practicies, challenges, threats. Like local trains being replaced by high speed big city connections, ferries between the continent and the British Isles tempting car passengers with bottom fares but charging pedestrians and cyclists the highest tariffs. Kick-off of our own European campaign?
  Dinner, night in town
  To be fitted in: ‘Brussels as you never have seen it – alternative sigtseeing tour through the unknown by-ways of a city of many nations.

Sunday 18

• 10.30-11.00: How do we bring Europe into our living room – and our living room back to Europe?
  Conclusions drawn from previous day, brainstorm aimed at three or more Heerlen proposals for the EU Green campaign 2009.
• 11.30-13.00: From Europhobia to Eurorealism.
  Towards an user-friendly EU, aimed at Heerlen propositions for a Europe of citizens.

Lunch

• 14.30-16.00: Action Plan 2009 - coordinators’ meeting open to all.