Fahrenheit - Issue 2

Fahrenheit 4.51 | 1

FAHRENHEIT 4.51magazine of the extraordinary

international session of the eypissue 2| december 15 2010

online edition

2 | Fahrenheit 4.51

After three days of intense work, you !nalised your resolutions yesterday. At the moment, you are relaxing by sleeping in or tobogganing and preparing yourselves for the challenge of the General Assembly.

After another intense day of work, the press team stayed up until 6am, reviewing your resolutions with care. By our enthusiasm towards your work, we want to show respect for the hard work you have done and further promote high quality dis-cussions in the General Assembly. Even though resolutions in EYP are indeed often undermined and seen as collections of vague phrases with no content – I may have claimed something along these lines myself – they are still the concrete re-sult of your work, and as such deserve the atten-tion of all the participants of this session.

Most importantly, there is no reason to under-mine the resolutions this time. "ere are several original ideas on your motions – the two and a half days of committee work have clearly been spent productively. For instance, the Commit-tee on Foreign A#airs I has taken an extremely interesting, realist approach to human rights vio-lations in China – something not too common

on EYP resolutions as Sophie Debrunner Hall points out. To balance the realism of AFET I, we naturally also have committees that have decided to go for the ideal solutions, no matter how un-reasonable they may sound.

Both AFET I and the more idealistic committees have taken the advice of Vice-President Stamos Tahas seriously: We need to feel more passion-ate about our resolutions. "at is also one of the goals of this issue of Fahrenheit 4.51. Read the resolutions, read our reviews, and take a stand. Two days is too long a time to be wasted falling asleep, only waiting for the next break – no mat-ter how long you stayed up in your cabins the previous night.

"e General Assembly is your chance to discuss and debate a variety of current European and global issues – a chance that you don’t get too often, and a chance you de!nitely miss as an of-!cial. For many of you, this will be your last time as a delegate in EYP.

Yours,

jari marjelund

Call to Arms

by the editor

Fahrenheit 4.51 | 3

4 | Fahrenheit 4.51

Content

9–10

12–15

21–22

29–30

Fahrenheit 4.51 | 5

Contributors

ben brown Journalist, the United Kingdom

dan brown Journalist, the United Kingdom

jan bubienczyk Journalist, Finland

lavrentia christodoulou Journalist, Greece

marie dromey Journalist, Ireland

ben english Journalist, Ireland

justus goettemann Journalist, Germany

sophie debrunner hall Journalist, Switzerland

sara juricic Journalist, Croatia

schima labitsch Journalist, Austria

lars melakoski Journalist, Finland

zahra runderkamp Journalist, the Netherlands

Fahrenheit 4.51 is the o!cial magazine of the Extraordinary International Session of the European Youth Parliament. It has been typed in adobe garamond pro by Robert Slimbach, alte haas grotesk by Yann le Coroller, nautik by Henning Skibbe and fontin sans by Jos Buivenga.

6 | Fahrenheit 4.51

Sure, it can be a prettier time of year. Sure, sometimes you luck out and get a cool present that you really wanted, and now as a result you have self-actualised, the most popular kid in school. Sure, the family might get together and eat some good food. But – I don’t get the point of Christmas. I may earn my-self nicknames along the lines of “"e Grinch” or “Embittered Girl on the Verge of Becoming a Crazy Old Cat Lady ” but all I want to do is to shed some light on the issue of Christmas. Real light, opposed to the preferred humming, dancing and ultimately, twinkly Christmas lights.

Why do we feel the duty to adorn our homes with decorations which are mainly centered on a fat guy with a herd of mythical child-creatures who appear to be enslaved? I don’t think anyone can claim that they can escape the hell that is being a consumer at Christmas time. Money $itters out of your hands faster than sand, there is the painful stress of trying to employ telepathy when it

comes to present shopping and then, you have to deal with the absolute hell that is the physical act of shopping. Tides of hassled and harassed shop-pers, pushing and sweating their way past me. I despise them all. "ere is also the social aspect of Christmas gifts: it is somehow unacceptable not to always give something in return. I am tired of awkward situations where I haven’t bought a gift in return for someone else – and have to plaster a smile on my face and make a $ustered and false excuse about leaving the gift at home. Obli-gation ensures that awkwardness will ensue, closely followed by some hastily bought gift thrust into the hands of the other – who now thinks you just don’t care.

Christmas is now only a mere few weeks away. In fact, I nearly allow myself to think about it at this point. However, I have had Christmas cheer shoved down my throat since September. When soci-ety is exposed to Christmas music and tacky shiny decorations for almost one

third of the year, how is the actual day itself going to be anything but anticli-mactic?

In the end, what about the validity of Christmas cheer? Christmas is a reli-gious holiday based on the central !gure of Christianity. Ignoring the fact that it is holiday which gives indiscriminate preference to one religion, Christmas – as society de!nes it – doesn’t even le-gitimately cover its religious basis – in-stead, it is a warped mess of consumer-ism and disappointment.

I haven’t had some horrid childhood incident where I saw my mother kiss-ing Santa Claus with the result of be-ing perpetually nauseated by Christmas cheer. Rather, I feel that we shouldn’t limit kindness, goodwill and pretty dec-orations to a speci!c time of the year. If you want to be nice, I urge you to just be honest about it. Don’t bother with the seasonally dictated behaviour. –mr

christmas > Marie Dromey surprises us all by being a cynical party pooper.

How Marie Stole Christmas

“When society is exposed to Christmas music and tacky

shiny decorations for almost one third of the year, how is

the actual day itself going to be anything but anticlimatic?”

Fahrenheit 4.51 | 7

Wealth is something quite frequently connected with Norway. "is has much truth and point behind it – Norway has the 2nd highest GDP per-capita in the world. Norway is the !fth largest oil exporter and third largest gas exporter in the world. Norway is the country with the highest living standards – and costs – and arguably the most $ourish-ing economy in Europe. It is a proud member of the European Economic Area but not a Member State of the Eu-ropean Union. Is this cherry-picking or simply sustainable surviving – are Nor-wegians nothing but opportunists? Do they give Europe or the world anything in return?

"e main reason behind the decade-long economic growth in Norway is oil. A substantial amount of oil was found on Norwegian property in the early 1960s. Since modern welfare is, more or less, built up on fossil fuels, Norway was a nation that had just won on a global lottery. "e oil, combined with other natural resources such as !sh, gas

and wind-power, guaranteed that Nor-way became nearly self-su%cient – and was able to start exporting its products, thus further boosting the economy.

It was also in the early 60s when Nor-way !rst discussed the matter of joining the European Economic Community, at the time the biggest economic bloc in the world. Norway, along with the United Kingdom and a few other coun-tries, applied for membership in 1963. France rebu#ed the British application, also suspending the negotiations with other countries. "is happened twice. In 1972, Norwegian application was accepted by the EEC – but not by the Norwegian public. In the 1972 refer-endum, membership was rejected with 53.5% of votes against.

Norway is the 4th most important trad-ing partner of the EU. Being a mem-ber of the EEA and the Schengen Area, Norway has the right to vote in several bodies, programmes and initiatives of the EU. In practise, it gets the bene!ts

– but doesn’t need to pay. Norway is naturally under EU legislation that is directly related to the market sector – Norway just doesn’t need to pay any form of EU taxes. "is does sound too good to be true. However, the EU is de-pendent on Norwegian oil. No matter how much we try to deny it, we need Norway – if not as a Member State, at least in the role they have now. "is gives Norwegians the upper hand in ne-gotiations with the EU – they get what they want for a half price.

"is all might sound very rude against Norway, which is not at all my inten-tion. "ey do use their wealth for good as well. Norway is one the larg-est donors for the United Nations, for instance. Rather, a country with this calibre of strategic thinking should be praised – the EU is not worthy of them. When in rough times like this and in desperate need of someone to blame, forget about blaming Norway. It would probably be an EU Member State if it weren’t for the French. –lm

norway > Lars Melakoski forgives the lucky oil drillers.

“Is this cherry-picking or simply

sustainable surviving – are Norwegians

nothing but opportunists?

The Nordic Renegade

8 | Fahrenheit 4.51

Welcome to Norway! In eager anticipa-tion of this extraordinary session many of you will have faced the same ques-tions: Where is Lillehammer? Why are we going outside the EU to do EYP? What will Norway be like? Will I get to hang out with reindeers and Vi-kings? Now, I don’t suppose that you, proud European citizens you are, are completely unaware of the basic pro-!le of the great country of Norway and – unlike one of my ex-girlfriends – know essential details like its capital for instance. Yes, this is embarrassing to

admit and no, this is not the only rea-son she is now my ex. Yet, as you arrive in the unique setting of Lillehammer, some cultural preparation is necessary.

Lesson 1: Norwegians have interesting manners. Quite shy at !rst, they let out their inner tiger only when they have known you for a bit. Studying in the UK and knowing about the general bluntness of certain European people, remember this and beware of too much ‘ladish banter’ in public. You might end up in social detention.

Lesson 2: Don’t ever consider Scandi-navia a single entity. "is is especially important for all you Southerners who have probably labelled Scandinavia with a big IKEA sign all over on your map. Historically, there is a big divide be-tween Sweden, Norway and Denmark. To simplify matters a bit, just keep in mind: Sweden once owned everyone up there ‘back then’. Norway is the ugly, rich brother of Sweden. And Denmark is just the Canada of Europe really.

norway > A seasoned visitor in Norway, Justus Goettemann gives us four simple tips on how to survive our last days in Lillehammer.

Fahrenheit 4.51 | 9

Lesson 3: Norway is expensive. Stay away from Vinmonopolet and avoid taxi rides whenever possible. "e luxu-ries of a normal lifestyle in your coun-try are hardly a#ordable for the normal folk not earning the real wages of the country with the highest HDI in the world.

Lesson 4: Beware of Norwegian food. Whether Lute!sk, Smørbrød or Re-insdyrsteik, Norway keeps surprising foreigners with exceptional cuisine. But: the mere thought of eating some-

thing that has basically been rotting in a sealed cask !lled will salty water for months might already put you o# – and if that doesn’t, the smell of it certainly will. But don’t worry – if things get too funky for you, the good old Swedish–Norwegian meatballs will surely not be far.

Whatever happens to you in the next ten days, you will !nd that being in Norway will change you probably as much as your EYP experience here will. Some might get to love the tidiness

and minimalist architecture of the cosy wooden cabins. Some might come to hate having to live in 30 seconds of dai-ly sunlight during the winter while not being able to escape the sun in the sum-mer. Others might just lose a thumb or toe in the –22 degrees that Lilleham-mer has in store for us all. Whatever happens, Norway will have an impact on you – enjoy it! –jg

Guide toNorway

10 | Fahrenheit 4.51

Eight years after the constitutional saga of the European Union began, the Lis-bon Treaty was !nally rati!ed. How-ever, the constitutional development of the EU hasn’t come to an end.

Imagine the White House calling the EU to discuss issues of importance. Who would they call? Who would an-swer? "e European Parliament, as the directly elected parliamentary institu-tion of the European Union, the Eu-ropean Commission as the executive body of the EU – or should they rely on the Convention on the Future of Europe, a body that has !nished with its work in 2003?

Integration in the EU can in principle proceed in two ways. "e !rst one is based on the theory of institutional-ism, believing that things should stay more or less the way they were when established. "e other theory, the one that the Committee of Constitutional A#airs has chosen as the leading one in their resolution, is the theory of func-tionalism, the idea of shifting respon-sibility for resolving problems. Under functionalism, the role of governments

is to be progressively reduced by indi-rect methods.

"ere is a number of methods that have been processed by AFCO, most of them focused on implementing functional-ism when approaching the subject of constitutional development. When try-ing to be understandable, the key factor is to be simple. On that note, they call for changing the nomenclature of the representatives of the EU institutions, for the better understanding of certain roles, but certainly without degrading their competences. "at way President of the European Council would in fact be Chief Councellor, President of the European Parliament Speaker of the EP and President of the European Com-mission would become High Commis-sioner. "at way the institution would breathe easier and be understandable. On the note of the Chief Councellor, they wold urge and highly recommend him to attend at least ten out of the twelve parliamentary sessions held in Strasbourg, in order to be able to im-plement the idea even better.

Experience, mixed with knowledge and

expertise make the combination that provides us with someone able to act in the general interest of the EU as a whole. In the name of that, AFCO is endorsing the European Commission to compose a selection of experts unaf-!liated with Member States.

Not only are these points of great mat-ter, they are vital for the survival of the institution of the EU as it has been so far. Currently, they can be implement-ed as the results of the !nally concluded Lisbon Treaty. We, as one, should make sure that the impact the Lisbon Treaty has and had been shown and imple-mented in further EU discussions and problems. –sj

constitutional a!airs > “Intergovernmental conferences, the European Parliament, the European Commission or the Convention on the Future of Europe: How should the European Union seek to approach the subject of constitutional development after the Lisbon Treaty?” By Sara Juricic.

The AgeAfter Lisbon

Fahrenheit 4.51 | 11

If tackling issues concerning discrimi-nation against minorities or active prejudices averse to race or genetic at-tributes might render a challenge – try adding women into the picture. Con-sidering issues concerning minorities and women’s rights can be traced back to as far as documented evidence came to exist. "e Committee on Women’s rights and Gender Equality has taken a no less critical stance on this issue than any other investigative body before.

With the course of time, the perspective on women’s rights has taken numer-ous turns and shades that have always brought new attention and critique to the issue. Now, with extended freedoms in Europe concerning immigration, multicultural societies have started to prevail in the race for attention for the public eye. "e key matters in ques-tion, as also addressed by FEMM, are brie$y lack of clear dialogue between main minority communities in ques-tion and European bodies and non-governmental organisations responsible for implementing change as well as lack of concrete knowledge on either side of the spectrum.

In retrospect when looking at back at key issues, the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender equality has taken a rather cosmopolitan and communica-tions centered approach with dealing with these issues. Not only are high pro!le urges directed at currently oper-ating institutions of the European Un-ion, but also a vast amount of encour-agement is $ying about. "is, however, is not as such a second-rate idea. If one would consider forceful imposition of direct change upon women in minor-ity communities, the damage caused could be irreversible if considering cul-tural discrepancies between dominating communities.

On the other hand, we have a full-scale European issue at hand, where costs venture hand in hand with the sustain-ability of measures issued. "is means that cost-e%cient means can be factors to the success of dealing with discrimi-nation and prejudices against women in minority communities. Hence, means of raising public awareness through the comparably cheap internet-based re-sources can be vital contributors to the resolution of this issue. Furthermore,

to a#ect the largest possible widespread of targets, these online means of com-municating knowledge in cooperation with the concept of subsidiarity could be well the currently best possible course of action. "ese actions have, unsurprisingly, been addressed by the committee in question.

Inadvertently, the committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equal-ity has addressed balanced costly and cost-e%cient methods of dealing with the key issues of this topic. It is cru-cial that such issues, even concerning human rights or female rights, should be looked upon as if through a kalei-doscope, seeing not only the underly-ing, but also the indirectly proportional subtopics such as the economy. It is most de!nitely our priority as Euro-peans, as we are claimed to be “United in Diversity”, that we look upon each issue with numerous strings attached. Otherwise, consequences such as the liquid-like recession will keep on slip-ping through our !ngers. –jb

women’s rights and gender equality > “Europe’s double jeopardy: How should the European Union, the Council of Europe and independent stakeholders work together to help increase opportunities for women from minority communities?” By Jan Bubi-enczyk.

Women and Their Rights


interview > Martin Flatø and Magnus Skjelmo Kris-tiansen are the two men who made the impossible possible. Lavrentia Christodoulou interviews the two heroes of every-day life who dared to take over the challenge and re-build the dream from the ashes. >

The Santa Clauses of Lille-hammer


MMartin – a 26-year-old Masters stu-dent of economics in Oslo. A past of working in the Norwegian embassy in Eritrea and as a teacher at a school. Magnus – a 23-year-old Bachelor of Political Sciences. EYP-wise, they have been around EYP since 2003 and 2005 respectively – Martin actually head-organised Magnus’ !rst EYP experience ever.

If you ask them why they are part of EYP, they will both say that it is a unique educational programme, where they can get to know people they would have never met under normal circum-stances – and somehow achieve long-lasting, interesting discussions.

Head organising a session is de!nitely something that needs courage and to-tal devotion. Especially now that those two people have taken over the vision of another peope, with the intention of bringing it one step forward. What ac-

tually made them accept the challenge was the trust they have for each other and their passion for EYP. As soon as Magnus experienced the enthusiasm of Norwegian Alumni and realised that he would be able to work for the ses-sion 24/7, he was positive that it would be worth the e#ort. For Martin, it was more impulsive, since he was in Africa by the time all the e-mails were sent – but Magnus, with his organisational tal-ent, managed to convince him to make the big decision. Transmitting someone else’s vision was of course not easy, but as soon as they managed to build their own picture for this session, they took advantage of everything Tromsø 2010 and Lillehammer 2010 could have in common – for example the environ-mental theme. "at made it possible for them to ful!l the gap between the two sessions.

On the question if the Extraordinary International Session of the EYP is a

real International Session, they both give a loud yes! Magnus clari!es that the session includes all the important ele-ments of an International Session, and having a smaller number of participants is not always worse. Martin adds that in some ways this session might be bet-ter than a “numbered” session since its size makes it more intimate – people get to know each others’ names, it is easier to approach each other and in the end, everyone can have a chance to ‘read’ the other participants. ‘Extraordinary’ for them means every single aspect of the session, from having so many people expecting Lillehammer 2010 and try-ing to get one of the available places to come here to hosting the session in the venues of the 1994 Winter Olympic Games.

"e Head Organisers are the ones who bring the session together. Being a suc-cessful leader of such a large project requires several skills. For these two

M


men, the quali!cations needed to be-come a Head Organiser are the same that characterise a talented organiser. Martin says that it feels like being one kind of a chair – a chair who needs devoted organisers and is ready to act spontaneously and take over the tasks which need to be done. However, the most important characteristic would be the awareness on how to take advantage of the human resources one has in his use. "ey both emphasised the absolute necessity of mutual trust among them and their organisers, and they consider themselves really lucky to have so many willing and productive EYPers in the team. Magnus, the President of the EYP Norway Alumni Association, states that it wasn’t that easy for EYP Norway to organise a second International Session in such a short time, but it was possible thanks to the people who were willing to work for it. Of course, there were dif-!cult moments, like sponsors not ful-!lling their initial agreement, but they

never thought of giving up – and fortu-nately, everything has turned out well.

Can you actually lead another life while head organising an International Ses-sion? "e answer from Magnus and Martin is yes – if you manage to plan properly and structure your day. Mar-tin said that there are some moments when you need to have another life, and Magnus adds that after a produc-tive day, a night o# is a must. "e most unexpected thing that happened to them during the preparation was the booking of Birkebeineren, the accom-modation venue. Initially, the place was booked by handball players who were supposed to stay there for the Cham-pionships. However, the director called Martin and said that they would cancel the booking in order to have the place available for Lillehammer 2010!

According to Magnus, Martin is one of the most brilliant persons he has ever

met – especially gifted with analytical skills and able to combine many di#er-ent and creative ideas to produce a great result. Martin is always smiley, and as Magnus said, he is the one who keeps everyone calm and connects himself with many di#erent people in a way that makes him really charming. As for Magnus, Martin describes him as a real-ly focused person, with a great ability to solve every issue even in the late hours at night and a developed sense of caring about others. Martin said that Magnus is the one who creates the structure in the team and keeps everything organ-ised. What do they have in common? "ey are both direct people and they never compromised since they decided to take over the challenge and give us an unforgettable gift – the modern-day Santa Clauses! –lc

M


What would you change in EYP if you had the chance? Unluckily, I didn’t say travel costs. Instead, I stupidly an-swered: “I wish people would be pas-sionate about their resolutions – believe they really could change the world”.

How could we feel passionate about resolutions? How do we feel passion-ate about anything – like music? We feel passionate about something that expresses us, awakens our beliefs, our feelings, our ideas. Why is this not the case with resolutions? Why don’t we all fall into a !ery trance in the General Assembly? Why don’t we try to convert people to support a resolution that so much expresses us?

We do it all the time with our preferred music. “What music do you listen to? Listen to this, you might like it” we say, sharing something that expresses us, ex-cited about presenting something that means so much to us. Admittedly, reso-lutions are music we have to make for ourselves. Still, every steamed debate I have seen in the EYP – steamed not for

the sake of debate – has been on eth-ics and morals: animal rights, human rights and nuclear power. "ey weren’t topics proposed by sponsors because, frankly, we do not really care about ITC and new ways of implementing it, or if electricity or gas are placebos.

I am not saying that we should discard topics proposed by the sponsors. It is the same with animals in zoos. Until you can safeguard a population in the wild, you cannot close them down. "us, we cannot say no to sponsors and their suggested topics. We need them – probably always will. However, we generally believe in and are opinionated about other things. We feel passionate about our views and opinions that stem from our ideologies.

Surely there are topics that most can !nd some interest in. Human rights in China, the NATO and Afghanistan, saving the Boreal forests, violence in sports, pensions and what is to be our future. Surely delegates have at least some emotional investment in these is-

sues, one idea they can all share. What happens – why can’t we focus?

"e answer is: there are alternatives – very attractive alternatives. "ere is partying, and there are the stimulating, exciting, weird and funny individuals – and plenty of sexually attractive people of the opposite sex. We congratulate ourselves in EYP for doing so much with so little sleep. I do. However, then we begin sleeping in committee work. We !nd ourselves dozing o#, begging for a rest and some sleep. Yes, we do come up with resolutions in the end. So did Nelson Mandela, although he was in prisong for over twenty years. I am sure he wasn’t wishing for naps, and he wasn’t thinking of what is for lunch, when the next co#ee break is or whether the French delegate liked him. Well, maybe he did – but not to an extent that a#ected his cause. Yes, he had 27 years and not much to do. We have three – not full – days and so many things we can do. How do you expect us to innovate in such a limited time with so many things going around?

general assembly > Vice-President Stamos Tahas ponders on why we don’t feel pas-sionate about resolutions.

MakeYourselves

Proud


Stimulation leads to physical stress. Or, I am not sure. People discussing the topics and coming up with resolutions are usually about 18 years old. I know that when I was 18, I wanted to change the world. I am still keen to do some-thing around those lines – and why not through a resolution? Making it great, making it expressive, making it passion-ate.

Time doesn’t matter as much as we think. If we feel passionate, if we feel as if the issue was hanging from us, what would we do? Yes – compromise. "at is what we do in EYP. However, believe in what you do even when you compro-mising. Find something you believe in. "ink of “who am I being here”? Am I an ambassador to my country? Maybe. Am I an ambassador to myself? Yes. Be an ambassador to yourself. Do not try to be witty but to come up with some-thing that serves what you believe in.

You will argue. However, from these ar-guments or, better, di#erences in opin-ion, you get to hopefully understand

how extraordinarily di#erent we are from each other. It is important to be able to say that “I do not disagree with you, I simply do not agree as I have a di#erent opinion, a new way of looking at the topic”.

Even though we have these di#erences, we reach nothing but a pile of phrases and dry words if we don’t believe in our resolutions. We can agree and work to-gether. If we weren’t, the human animal wouldn’t be on the top of the biological hierarchy it is today.

Maybe we agree by being not that pas-sionate, by not stabbing a fellow del-egate with a polar bear tooth – that we found on the side of the road and were wearing as a necklace for the past few days – because he rejected our belief as stupid. However, by being passionate we agree on passionate things. We get excited. We rediscover the crucial im-portance of imagination. We get over the fear of failing in the General As-sembly. We !nd a meaning and justi!-cation for being here – in Lillehammer!

In Norway. In Europe. In the world? A reason for getting out of bed after !ve hours of sleep. Because that is what you need – a draw, a motive to get out of bed and in your suit, out in the cold and into committee work.

For me, the essence of being passion-ate about resolutions and getting out of bed comes from the following wise conversation:

“When you wake up in the morning Pooh” said Piglet at last, “what’s the !rst thing you say to yourself?’

“What’s for breakfast?” said Pooh.

“What do you say, Piglet?”

“I say, I wonder what’s going to happen exciting to-ay?” said Piglet.

Pooh nodded thoughtfully.

“It’ the same thing”, he said. –ST


Welcome to the land of snow, skiing, reindeers, Vikings and &ords. Welcome to the country of 385,155 square kil-ometers, 4,900,000 people and a coast-line of 25,000 kilometers. Welcome to the country of ships, Harald V, Alex-ander Rybak – and according to the United Nations, the most developed country in the world-

Norway lies in the west of Scandinavia. It borders Sweden, Finland and Russia. From all the way south to all the way north, Norway is almost 1,800 kilom-eters long – that is approximately the distance between Amsterdam and Sic-ily. However at some points, the coun-try is only 80 kilometers wide. Norway is also one of the most sparsely populat-ed countries in the world. "e highest mountaintops are Galdhoepiggen and

Glittertind – both circa 2,650 meter high. Around 3% of the country is suit-able for agriculture – and ground, cities and roads are built. "e other, say, 95% are woods, mountains, rivers and lakes. Kongeriket Norge is a parliamentary constitutional monarchy – it is ruled by King Harald V and governed by a coalition government of the Workers Party, Centrum Party and the Social-ist Left under Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg. Norway is one the found-ing members of the UN and the NATO – but not a Member State of the Eu-ropean Union despite four attempts. According to Jose Manuel Barroso, however, if Norway is to ever apply for membership again, the process would go very quickly. First and foremost, Norway wants to keep control over its !sh, oil and gas reserves. One could ar-

gue that it is not realistic to expect Nor-way to apply for EU membership in the near future. After the !nancial crises, the Norwegian krone is deemed to be one of the most solid currencies in the world – if you haven’t converted your money yet, too it soon.

Lillehammer had exactly 19,638 in-habitants in 2007, and it is exactly 11,98 square kilometers. Lillehammer is best known for the 1994 Olympic Games, and the 2004 Junior Eurovi-sion song festival. Besides shops, super-markets and cinemas, Lillehammer is best known for its arenas for skiing and snowboarding. However, there is not much more to say by me: I will leave it up to you to discover Lillehammer yourself! –zr

norway > Zahra Runderkamp provides us with the essentials of our host country.

Harald’s Realm


From green electricity to sustainable co#ee, from organic farming to animal welfare. As of today, over 350 ecolabels have been developed, uniting a wide range of products under the same cri-teria: eco-friendliness. Ecolabels are the !rst step into the direction of a sustain-able society. Corporations want – or are forced to – implement ecolabels on their products and services, mainly due to increased awareness among the consumers. It is however not certain if these ecolabels, also known as green la-bels, have accomplished what they were developed for.

"e variety of ecolabels is considerable. As they all have di#erent rules and reg-ulations, it is di%cult for the consumer to actually be aware of all the labels and what they stand for. Even though the EU established an EU ecolabel in 1992 to unify the existing labels into one, other labels still exist and spread in Europe.

To obtain an ecolabel, the whole pro-duction process has to be sustainable. "e price of the product will thus natu-rally be higher. When buying an envi-ronmentally friendly product, you are basically also paying for the processes

that it takes for a product to get its la-bel.

As such, ecolabels don’t have any value. In order for them to work, they need to be understood, trusted and valued as tools for consumers’ decision-making. Due to the lack of awareness of the va-riety of ecolabels, as well as their di#er-ences, ecolabels still have a long way to go before they can truly make a di#er-ence. Change indeed starts with your-self – but starting that change could still be easier. –zr

green light for green ideas > Zahra Runderkamp wonders whether labeling prod-ucts as environmentally friendly will make any di"erence.

Friends or Foes


Energy production and distribution is big business. Energy is, after all, nec-essary and critical to any society. Be it in homes or businesses, industries or services, electricity is crucial. Europe is, however, facing an energy crisis alongside the rest of the world. With the major depletion of fossil fuels, it is essential energy supply and demand is taken seriously and new strategies are designed to make sure Europe remains an important part of the energy market.

Europe’s commitment to the 2020 cli-mate objectives of reducing emissions by 20%, increasing renewable energy by 20% and improving energy e%-ciency by 20% shows commitment to change. However, such a pledge is easily made but far from easily attained. Eu-rope is currently not on target to meet

these requirements. In order to make these objectives more feasible and to se-cure Europe’s position as an established energy supplier, Europe is developing and using an enhanced energy grid. "e key question is what should Europe do to develop this new energy grid so both the climate objectives are achieved, but also Europe’s position as an in$uential energy producer is maintained?

"e Committee on Industry, Research and Energy tackled this key question and has provided a challenging and comprehensive resolution. "ey see in-vestment as the key strategy. "ey ar-gue that more investment should come from both European governments and private companies to help implement research in energy production, espe-cially that of renewable energy. "is is

a strong argument and a logical one. Clearly the success of Europe’s energy grid will depend upon the science be-hind it. "e only logical help the Eu-ropean governments can provide is through !nancial investment. "is has proven to be an important and suc-cessful contribution as the provision of funds and investment in research and development undoubtedly helps us get closer to solving the problem.

"e Committee argues that it is not just about the supplier that was important in stimulating energy production, but also the consumer. "ey believe that making sure consumers have a greater choice of energy suppliers available to them allows for a more competitive market. Economically speaking, this argument is plausible as the greater

industry, research and energy > “In order to achieve its ambitious goals in the field of future energy production; what strategy should Europe adopt when developing its future energy grid?” By Dan Brown.

Knittingthe Grid

“Clearly the success of Europe’s

energy grid will depend upon the

science behind it.”


number of companies involved in the market allows for greater competition. "e implementation of this is, however questionable. Surely, it is down to the companies themselves to attract con-sumers and make themselves available. How the EU could make external oper-ators appear more accessible and attrac-tive to consumers is di%cult to under-stand. "e fact that the Committee has mentioned bridging the gap between consumers and providers is important, as clearly it is a strong consumer market that would secure the future of Europe’s energy grid. Yet, perhaps the role of the EU would be more suited to working at altering the market foundations to en-hance the position of the energy suppli-ers as opposed to try and making them more available.

"e resolution draws attention to in-frastructure and its importance in helping the energy grid. "e view that Europe should promote its energy ef-!cient buildings more to inspire oth-ers, is a feasible one. "ere are clearly many examples whereby energy e%-cient buildings are successful. "e di-rection in which the Committee have taken the topic is excellent as the im-portance of infrastructure cannot be stressed enough. What would however, strengthen the resolution would be to have a discussion on infrastructure de-signed speci!cally for energy. "ere are many examples of this, the best of which include “electricity highways”, whereby energy is channelled from the wind farms of northern Europe to the centre. A further example is Carbon Capture Storage, undoubtedly the most

contemporary form of infrastructural advancement. Both schemes are hugely successful and proven to work.

Nevertheless, the resolution presented by the Committee on Industry, Re-search and Energy is a well thought out and well structured resolution which explores numerous strategies. Clearly, investment and infrastructure are two crucial themes which have been used in this resolution a#ectively. "ere is clearly room for expansion as some sources remain vague. However, it is a logical and cogent resolution which will no doubt stand strong against the op-position it will come up against in the General Assembly. –db


JEANPIERRE LE DOUCHEAutumn/Winter 2010 Collection


foreign a!airs ii > “On the matter of NATO’s continuing role in Afghanistan: When, or subject to which criteria being fulfilled, would ending Europe’s military engagement be desirable? What approach should European states take in shaping the country’s fu-ture?” By Justus Goettemann.

On August 30, Barack Obama formal-ly brought an end to US combat opera-tions in Iraq seven years and 165 days after the invasion began. It was time for America “to turn the page”, Obama said. "is set the tone for a momentous movement to push ahead with actions in Afghanistan as well. Military pundits had cherished the e#ects of the “surge” in Iraq. "us it was not surprising that Obama would soon enough announce similar measures in Afghanistan in turn putting pressure on the respective military partners of the US there to do likewise. Potential policy initiatives as regards pulling out of Afghanistan will naturally be judged on the precedent case of Iraq.

NATO’s involvement in Afghanistan dates back to December 2001 when the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) was created. At the time, no one could envisage that it should ultimately

draw support from almost 50 di#er-ent countries with more than 130,000 soldiers as it does today. Yet despite this overwhelming presence of allied troops in the most active war zone in the world today, the situation in Iraq and Afghanistan is crucially di#erent. "ere are certain geographical, politi-cal and economic di#erences that have led to caution many pundits about the actual e#ectiveness of straightforward copycat versions of counterinsurgency policies à la Iraq in Afghanistan. At the same time, the involvement of NATO troops engages EU Member States on two levels: politically and concerning its military potentially causing consid-erable tension between the two organi-sational bodies.

Against the backdrop of these challeng-es, the resolution of committee AFET II is rightfully voicing concerns about the lack of a functioning Afghan state and

the consequences this has for military forces in their !ght against terrorism there. "e basic Afghan “stabilization” problem is quite di#erent to the one in Iraq for instance. "e challenge in Iraq is essentially one of rebuilding, where-as in Afghanistan it is one of building from scratch. Prior to March 2003, Iraq was a functioning state with enormous potential for petroleum-fuelled growth. Iraq boasted an educated population and professional business and govern-ment classes. None of these factors ex-ist in Afghanistan. In recent memory, Afghanistan has never approached even a basic level of national organisation or sophistication. Large part of the reason for this is the general lack of a central governmental leadership and admin-istration hampering the introduction and revision of reliable state structures and educational standards that could help kick-start the economy.

Should I Stay orShould I Go?


Aside from addressing evident draw-backs that the armed con$ict in Af-ghanistan has on economic and social structures, it is notable to state that the resolution speci!cally acknowledges a causal chain between the presence of troops in the country and the continu-ation, often even intensi!cation, of the con$ict between the intruding nations and the tribes or factions prevailing in Afghanistan. Even the considerable e#orts and hope that many a military leader might be putting into radically increasing the number and kinds of sol-diers down there, are dismissed by the committee’s stance that “bigger does not necessarily mean better”. Its argu-ment for a select deployment of troops is underscored by the critical reference of OED’s and ISAF’s activities.

"ese points lead the committee’s reso-lution to result in three major policy proposals: increased European inde-

pendence in the handling of military actions and their caveats as well as indi-vidual diplomatic relationships, transi-tion of authority over security forces to locals, and external investments.

Overall, the objectives put forward in the resolution of AFET II seem ambi-tious to say the least. Given the wave of suicide bomber attacks that has struck the country this year alone and the lack of progress troops from all over the world have made in gaining a sustain-able foothold in Afghanistan suggest that large swaths of the Afghan popula-tions still run the risk of falling to the Taliban. Paired with a lack of govern-mental certainty in a country that has been in a state of civil war punctuated by occupations from Russia and the US, some of the proposals might ap-pear to be unrealistic in the medium run. It seems surreal to imagine General Electric or Vodafone deciding to launch

a substantial foreign investment scheme into the communications sector and the likes of this war zone tomorrow. Yet interpreting the resolution as a myopic policy approach designed to gloss over the deep-rooted problems at issue with dulcet phrases falls way short of what it is actually aiming to do: AFET’s resolu-tion is an action plan for Afghanistan in the long run – a plan that gives objec-tives for these areas of the Afghan soci-ety, where the committee has found the country to have considerable potential to excel.

"e resolution of the Committee on Foreign A#airs II is not meant to be a short-lived !recracker for concrete day-to-day plans. In fact, it is a bold vision for the how to get the country back on track in the long run. –jg

“Overall, the objectives put forward in the

resolution of AFET II seem ambitious to say the least.”


It was of no surprise when Russia de-cided not to join the European Neigh-bourhood Policy. "eir clear aspirations to be an ‘equal partner’ of the EU and not a ‘junior partner’ made this inevi-table. In order to strike an acceptable balance, four Common Spaces for co-operation in di#erent spheres were cre-ated. "ese spaces, common economic space, space of freedom, security and justice, space on external security and space on research, education and cul-ture. Each sphere had a di#erent focus with the key aim of creating an interna-tional agreement.

"e Committee on International Trade was charged with the task of deter-mining how an agreement should be

reached with regard to the interests of all parties, something which is undeni-ably key for the future success of any future agreements.

In response to this question the Com-mittee chose to focus on several ideas throughout their resolution. "e crux of the argument is the idea of commu-nication and the need for a ‘two- way street’ when it comes to sharing ideas, funds and power. "ere is little doubt that this is essential. A successful agree-ment needs compromise alongside un-derstanding on both sides and this reso-lution goes a long way in seeking and achieving this. "e resolution sets out to achieve this via improving commu-nication methods such as the internet

alongside a key emphasis on ensuring that the organs of government and pil-lars of Europe work together far more e#ectively.

A very e#ective issue that the resolu-tion successfully addresses is the need for respect to be granted to Russia with regard to their economic prowess to Europe. It is undoubtedly a very sim-ple point, nonetheless it is crucial. If, in trying to reach an agreement, no sacri-!ce is made on a European level regard-ing economic matters, Russia would be able to damage the European economy extensively if they chose, or were, forced to do so. "e EU is Russia’s largest trad-ing partner, accounting for 52.3% of all foreign Russian trade in 2008 and 75%

international trade > “The EU–Russia co-operation on four common spaces: How should an agreement be reached with due consideration to the interests of all Member States and Russia?” By Ben Brown.

Bargaining with Putin


of foreign direct investment stocks in Russia also come from the EU. "e EU exported '105 billion of goods to Rus-sia in 2008 and Russia exported '173,2 billion to the EU clear evidence to sup-port this argument.

To develop this point further, 68.2% of Russian exports to the EU are account-ed for by energy and fuel supplies and in particular gas. Following events in the Russia–Ukraine gas dispute in 2009, there is little doubt that if forced into a corner, Russia will gladly retaliate using their economic power as made appar-ent when Vladimir Putin threatened to review Russia’s relations with the EU, “If Russia’s interests are ignored, we will also have to start reviewing the funda-

mentals of our relations”. "erefore, by having action points along these lines, a clear e#ort to prevent key areas of con-$ict is made in the resolution.

"e committee’s idea of “further ex-panding the Nabucco and Southstream grids in order to create a more com-petitive energy market” is to be wholly heartedly supported and is an excellent idea. It is a perfect demonstration of a ‘two-way agreement’ appealing to both parties in the long term.

Having said this not all elements of the resolution are so successful. "e con-cept of sharing intelligence regarding terrorism and international criminality between Interpol, Europol and the Rus-

sian Federal Security Service is fraught with problems. Not only would this be an organisational disaster, to force the most secretive agencies in the world to do something they are trained not to do, share intelligence, but it would also heighten the risk that such intel-ligence may be leaked when divulging it between more sources than necessary. Furthermore this sharing may expose secret informants and sources if shared.

"e resolution of the Committee on In-ternational Trade is well structured and thorough. Despite a few small weak points, it is strong and I have ever faith in its success. –bb

“The crux of the argument is the idea of

communication and the need for a ‘two-way street’.”


"e Committee on Environmental, Public Health and Food Safety I is af-fected by climate change in a rather unconventional way. "ey have worked on most recent political event of this International Session, the UN Climate Change Conference in Cancún, Mexi-co. Bearing in mind that the conference lasted from the 29th of November to the 10th of December, and therefore inconveniently only closed amidst of committee work, a broader approch to the topic had to be taken.

"e topic raises the issue whether Euro-pean countries should restrain from fur-ther involvement in intergovernmental conferences, and if so, which alterna-tives there are to take. "e conference, COP16 in short, engages in the UN

Framework Convention on Climate Change – an international, environ-mental treaty established in 1992 at the famous “Earth Summit“. It aims at sta-bilizing greenhouse gas concentrations and has in previous years, especially highlighting the Copenhagen Summit in 2009, lacked greater achievements and faced politicians being percieved contradictory in their outcome report as opposed to media press. "is confer-ence is in a crisis. In light of the severe consequences climate change provokes and inter-governmental approaches not being e%cient enough relative to the urgency of the issue, alternatives have to be explored.

"e key issue of ENVI I is indeed the exploration of di#erent agreements

and results from several EU and EU non-Member States whose outcomes provide the basis for their analysis of the current situation. By doing this, a common position is more likely to be taken as not so many interests have to be taken into consideration. Moreover, legally binding objectives are to be im-plemented, somethin which stands in contrast to the UNFCCC, which in its current form is a treaty without any le-gal bonds and can only provide manda-tory updates. Furthermore, the resolu-tion emphasise the di%culty to !nd a global approach to climate change, and the transparency on climate data as well as the crucial issue of the carbon o#set trading system are examined.

environment, public health and food safety > “In response to the UN Cancún Cli-mate Conference, should European countries now look beyond traditional intergovern-mental conferences and seek alternative means to move forward in the aftermath of the discussions 29th November – 10th December 2010?” By Schima Labitsch.

NewbornProgress?


As to the solutions, ENVI I makes a clear stand for smaller conferences and multi- and bilateral agreements. Fur-thermore, the veto right for countries at UNFCCC conferences is to be im-plemented, an issue which has troubled various countries and parties at the Co-penhagen conference in 2009.

"e problem this resolution faces is its original question. A debate about alter-natives of inter-governmental confer-ences gives few possibilites to work on something more than just comparisons of existing structures – and is a cra-dle for all kinds of “green“ solutions. "is topic is, in its essence, about the means by which climate is tackled on a supranational scale. However, it is hardly ever possible to work on such

a topic in a sophisticated manner un-less profound insight of reports and analysis of conferences is provided. In my opinion, this question entails the danger of running for the whole wide world of “green“ ideas, e.g. from a com-mon environmental policy to fossil fuels to renewable resources, as men-tioned in the resolution. "e reason why Copenhagen and Cancún failed is because compromise was not and could not take place. "e system of confer-ences is to be questioned, however, in light of the unfortunate collision of the Cancún conference with Lillehammer 2010 and the complexity of the topic, as well as lacking access to information. "e resolution’s scope is arguably nar-row. However, the endless fruitful dis-cussions of ENVI I only emerged out

of the frustration about the question, in the end not perceived in this resolution. "is very time, the process was mightier than the product. –sl

“As for the solutions, ENVI I takes

a clear stand for smaller conferences

and multi- and bilateral agreements.”


“"ere was a broad consensus on the principles of having sanctions, !nancial sanctions and non-!nancial sanctions.”

–Herman Van Rompuy, President of the European Council

"e !nancial crisis, debts and de!cits: all these words that have been repeat-ed many times over the last couple of months. However, concrete solutions had not yet been implemented by any framework or policy on a European lev-el a while back. "at is where Herman Van Rompuy’s taskforce came in.

In June 2010, EU leaders agreed on greater surveillance and coordination

of national budgets. Also, the wish for a high-level task force was conveyed, as a couple of months earlier, Greece had struggled with their debts – which are more than four times the EU limit. "is crisis has now spread to other EU countries with similar debt problems, such as Portugal and Spain. In order to save the euro, EU Member States have been forced to come up with mecha-nisms that would protect the euro, with all these debts, from collapsing.

"e Committee on Economic and Monetary a#airs has been discussing this issue over the last days, resulting in a resolution where the tight imple-mentation of existing frameworks and

sanctions for the aforementioned regu-lations – if they are not implemented – prevail, following the ideas of Van Rompuy’s taskforce.

"e benevolence of the expert that vis-ited this committee on the !rst day of committee work was of great value. Giv-ing concrete examples and being open to questions, the PhD candidate from the University of Oslo talked about the !nancial crisis and the economic situa-tion in several European countries. Af-ter that, the Committee spent a lot of time developing their vision about the Stability and Growth Pact, consider-ing this the most important and useful agreement. "e value of the taskforce

economic and monetary a!airs > “In reaction to the final presentations of Presi-dent Van Rompuy’s taskforce at the EU Council Meeting in October 2010, how should Europe move forward to ensure future secure economic governance?” By Zahra Runderkamp.

Rompuyto the Rescue


has never been questioned. However, it has been subject of questioning how we will implement it from A to Z.

One might question EU institutions and frameworks as such: they have very limited powers on economic policy and are always one step behind the current events. It has been discussed which things should be done to ensure a !rm implementation of the aforementioned taskforce, whilst regulating the econ-omy in a proper way to make its run-ning certain. However, the question of having to change the Lisbon Treaty has not come up in committee work. When one wants to change something crucial like this, a tiresome process with, for

example, referenda has to take place. It is, in the end, Europe’s inhabitants that should bene!t of this kind of regula-tions. "erefore it is only normal that their opinion is asked prior to the de!-nite implementation. Alternatives to Van Rompuy’s task force have been suggested, as the main cri-tique is that his taskforce mostly con-centrates on short-term solutions. Also, the intervention to market economic values might seem incorrect, there are standards and rights that ensure the free-market economy, one of the pillars the EU has been built on. Still, taking measures is at the moment necessary and today’s situation asks for people

to take the needed steps. As we cannot see into the future in any case, solving today’s problems seems to make much more sense than trying to predict some-thing unpredictable.

"e resolution of the Committee on Economic and Monetary A#airs as a whole is not controversial. Most of the measures have already been implement-ed; ECON emphasizes their necessity and value. "e main message is to con-tinue what we have already been doing, but in a better way. –zr


environment, public health and food safety ii > “Europe’s own carbon bank: What measures should be taken to prevent deforestation of Europe’s boreal

forest with due consideration to a"ected livelihoods?” By Lars Melakoski.

Cutting DownOur Future?


Boreal forests are our biggest carbon banks. Yet we cut them down for pa-per industries, burn to the ground, rinse and repeat. "e human demand for paper has grown to such an extent that paper and logging industries have recently raised by 15%, causing a mas-sive increase in global greenhouse gases since deforestation is responsible of about 20% of them.

Not only does deforestation harm our globe as such, but also the delicate eco-system of Boreal forests. "e majority of wildlife in Nordic regions depend on the Boreal forest – cutting down too much will result in the extinction of several species.

"e major problem, as with most of current issues, is !nding the balance with economics and the environment. Implementing di#erent kinds of regula-tions, taxes or limitations on how much forest one can clear-cut at once would lead into a massive blow in the eco-nomical aspects of the Boreal forests. Considering the rising demand of pa-per products and the general growth in the speci!c !eld, di#erent kinds of cut-downs would raise prices vastly. A wave of unemployment can also be foreseen, which can be especially tricky since for-esters are usually educated for their very speci!c !eld of work and will thus have di%culties !nding new jobs.

"e Committee on Environment, Pub-lic Health and Food Safety II has dis-cussed this very issue. In their resolu-tion they recognise the problems such as deforestation harming livelihoods, the eco-system, biodiversity and the

biosphere, in addition to problems as deforestation “feeding” our planet with greenhouse gases and timber not be-ing used e%ciently enough. "ey do however appreciate the work of non-governmental organisations such as the Forest Stewardship Council and the Foundation for Ecological Research in the North-East.

"e key solutions ENVI II focused on were forbidding deforestation to a cer-tain extent, the implementation of an ‘Eco-Police’ under the jurisdiction of the European Parliament and raising awareness of the general public by dif-ferent lectures and campaigns. Some of the focus was also put on the eco-nomical aspects of the problem with solutions such as subsidising the plan-tation of new Boreal forest areas as well as implementing a tax on all imported timber-based goods from outside the EU unless they carry a green label.

Problems in the EU are to be solved with legislation, whilst foreign prob-lems can be, to a certain extent, solved by EU playing an advisory role in the United Nations when it comes to Bo-real forest issues.

"e problem is, in my opinion, more economic than environmental. A big part of the existing Boreal forest is be-ing untouched and will remain such until the prices rise and the forest own-ers want to make bigger pro!t. Con-sidering this fact, I do not believe that focus should be put on the eco-system, but rather on the global warming aspect of the problem.

Simple solutions such as taxating im-ported products, without a “green la-bel”, are reasonable and do help the economic aspect, making the more environmentally friendly, more costly products competitive with non-eco-friendly ones, whilst the EU gains pro!t. In order for foreign products to be competitive they would also have to !ll certain standards, creating a chain-reaction which hopefully reduces the clear-cutting in most areas.

Subsidising the long time re-growth of cut down areas would result in a drastic increase in the carbon capture capacity of Boreal forests. "is seems to solve the problem, however it does have a mas-sive impact on production costs, unless subsidised to such a great extent that other subsidised areas, such as agricul-ture, will su#er. "e aforementioned import taxes could be a valuable asset to this budget, however that would end when non-Member State !ll the stand-ards, causing domestic products to be less competitive.

"e biggest problem, not yet properly tackled, is the wave of unemployment these measures would follow. A sub-stantial amount of foresters would lose their jobs, causing even bigger econom-ical problems within the EU.

"e main question lays in !nding the balance between the economical and ecological aspects, rather going towards the optimal solution step-by-step, than rushing into drastic measures. Especial-ly in economically hard times like these, too radical measures might be the fall of modern society. –lm


Depleting stocks, lack of regulations and the breaking of boundaries. "ese are just a minority of the issues which come to the fore upon the mentioning of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) of the European Union. "e Commit-tee on Fisheries faced the challenge of analysing the failures of the European Union to date with regard to the CFP, in addition to ensuring that Europe reacts in a collective manor which will preserve a future for !sheries in Europe.

"e resolution put forward by PESC highlights the shortcomings of the CFP, demanding solutions to problems raised. "e !rst key problem identi-!ed surfaces around the disproportion-ate implementation of the CFP and the problem which this creates. "e EU is issuing regulations to countries where, in some cases, there is simply no infrastructure in place to implement

the policies which the EU have pro-posed. With a policy which has a gun to the head of many primary industries around Europe, swift action is an im-perative. "e action proposed by PESC in this regard deals with the introduc-tion of stricter regulations which aim to foster a ethos of accountability and responsibility across EU waters. "ese measures deal comprehensively with the problem at hand and, although likely to receive some attention at the General Assembly for its feasibility, they are an e#ective step in preserving the future for the EU.

While the future of the EU !sheries looks brighter with stricter regulation, there must be a collective e#ort by the EU to further its research in order to help countries to compete properly in !sh markets. Measures proposed by PESC with regard to this issue at-

tempt to increase technology available and grants to develop research. While these three measures are by no means new to any resolution, the primary dif-ference lies in the e#ect they will have on the problem at hand. "rough the provision of such a clause which focuses on increasing involvement, PESC is en-suring a sustainable future for !sheries and the e#ective implementation of any future policies across all participating countries.

While both the aforementioned meas-ures are vital in order for Europe to react to the CFP, perhaps the most frequently debated aspect of the CFP at the Gen-eral Assembly will be over!shing. "ere have been lively debates between !sh-eries circles over the system of total al-lowable catches, something which the Committee dealt with via a conference call with Norwegian experts this week.

fisheries > “‘Another future for fisheries’: Learning the lessons of the 16th November Fisheries Conference, how should Europe react to the Common Fisheries Policy?” By Ben English.

Fishing ForSolutions


"e main $aw with the current system is the close connection which politi-cians have in the regulation of catching however, the committee acknowledged the need to change this throughout their discussions. With this in mind, they came to the conclusion that the system of total allowable catches should not be based on political in$uences, but more on the individual circumstances of each party which are constantly sub-ject to change. While this may be seen as a bold move by some skeptics in the Assembly, the Committee can argue that this measure fosters and ethos of transparency which is fundamental to the success of the policy.

In addition to this, the committee felt it imperative to address the issue of discarding !sh when one exceeds their quota. "is is something which has come under huge scrutiny with

the principle of discarding described as “ine#ective” and charging the UK £2.8 billion annually. "e committee’s innovative measure to ban !sh discard-ing and sell it to the state must surely be seen as the trump card within this resolution. In proposing what is cer-tainly a bold move, they are preserving stocks while increasing opportunity for exporting, a move which will not be frowned upon by anyone is this current economic climate.

On the other hand, the initiative of the committee to include non-EU coun-tries in conferences is a move which may face a certain degree of question-ing. Many critics have argued that the involvement of external countries to date has been a key factor in the failure of the EU to successfully implement the CFP. If this view is shared by other delegates, the committee may well !nd

themselves having to explain the prin-ciples behind their decision. "is was a principle of cooperation which was em-phasised in the discussion of this issue and while the skeptics may have a valid point, PESC will no doubt argue that we must exhaust all avenues in order to preserve the future of !sheries within the EU.

A lively and fruitful debate will no doubt ensue tomorrow. However, it remains hard to see delegates present rejecting a proposal which actually at-tempts to deal directly with the prob-lems concerning the CFP through proposing e#ective, e%cient solutions which will allow the EU to react ap-propriately to a policy which requires urgent attention. –be


Violence is about willingness to harm others. It is not a personality trait but rather a way a person uses emotions such as fear, shame or powerlessness to attain a goal. Violence in sport is a scourge that has increased in the past decades. Examples of black football players being taunted that can be found in English football in the 1970s, and similar outbursts still occur – the chief of the Croatian Football Federation, for example, spoke against homosexual-ity this year. Similarly, many fans have been seriously injured during fanatic manifestations after or during foot-ball, basketball and handball games. Yet, most of today’s sport fans consider themselves di#erent from the spectators of the Roman times.

Some violent behaviour against players or o%cials has sometimes been viewed as “part of the game”. Spectators often become so emotional and passionate about the game that they express their energy through violence. "is may re-sult in a melee on or o# the !eld en-forced by the strong need of today’s fans to identify themselves with the game and its outcome. It is obvious that any form of violent behaviour outside the rules of a sport or recreational activity should not be condoned. Organisations need to clearly articulate their stance on violent behaviour and promote a unify-ing Olympian spirit.

"e Declaration on Sport, Tolerance and Fair Play, which was signed on 11th

April 1996 in Amsterdam, was a big step forward to address the issue of vio-lence in sports at the time. It is however not su%cient anymore. In their resolu-tion, the Committee on Culture and Education has decided to categorise the main causes of violence in sport in four separate groups: sports, media, society and sanctions. At this point, we should emphasise the fact that it is not only football that su#ers from hooliganism. Sports such as basketball, handball and volleyball have been a#ected as well.

It is di%cult to come up with concrete suggestions on such a sensitive topic, especially when the stakeholders are the ones who have the power to impose sanctions. Nevertheless, there are still

culture and education > “In response to recent outbreaks of divisive violence and racism at European sporting venues, how should the energies of stakeholders in sport be shaped to promote a unifying Olympian spirit on the continent?” By Lavrentia Christodoulou.

Blood, Toil, Tears and Sweat


many things that can be done to im-prove the current situation.

"e expansion of anti-discrimination campaigns, the intensi!cation of the se-curity measures while entering the !eld, the involvement of non-governmental organisations and the development of a uni!ed anti-racism and anti-violence campaign are de!nitely ideas that have been discussed a lot in EYP. We can’t deny the that campaigns and co-oper-ation with non-governmental organi-sations could produce stable results if conducted properly. However, what about schools – the primary environ-ment where violence is cultivated due to the modern role models? A media campaign wouldn’t be e#ective there,

but the visit of a local sports team would de!nitely create a proper ground for developing sport ethics and collabo-ration.

"e operative clause on the CULT res-olution that caught my attention was the proposal to control the amount of alcohol purchased per person in Euro-pean sporting events. It is a fact that the overindulgence in alcohol or the usage of drugs are two of the main causes of violence in sports. However, how can someone manage to control the pur-chase of alcohol when pro!t is the only thing that actually matters?

As George Orwell said, serious sport has nothing to do with fair play. It is

bound up with hatred, jealousy, boast-fulness, disregard of all rules and sadis-tic pleasure in witnessing violence. In other words, it is war minus the shoot-ing. "ere are quite enough real causes of trouble already, and we need not add to them by encouraging young men to kick each other on the chins amidst the roars of infuriated spectators. –lc


Let’s begin with a case study. Legisla-tion has been passed in France that the legal age of retirement will increase to 62 by 2018. At the same time, the government is also pushing for a plan to increase the number of work years needed in order to claim a full pension, from 40.5 years now to at least 41.5 in the year 2020. We must consider all in-volved in such a radical change: those that employ, that work and also society as a whole.

To look intently at the situation in France, the main argument of the gov-ernment revolves around the question of how to !nance the actual form of

pension, considering that the system presents a gaping hole of '32 billion. However, only '2 billion represents the real debt of the pension fund, the 30 other billions being the result of the 2008 !nancial crisis, arti!cially heaped on top of those funds, in order for, as usual, the people to pay for capitalism’s erratic management. To the external observer, this seems absolutely insane. Of course, it wasn’t taken lightly by citizens: strikes, demonstrations, block-ades, petrol shortages and even acts of violence were the response of the peo-ple in the face of such audacity. How-ever, these acts slowed and as the bill was passed, we are left wondering, who

exactly bene!ts from legislation such as this?

It so often happens in EYP that we see resolutions which shy away from look-ing at the true current situation and instead inserts vague clauses, which typically include the words “media campaign”, that end up doing little more than sounding eloquent and tak-ing up space on what was once un-adul-terated white paper. Having an open mind and being receptive to new ideals is what is necessary for a topic such as this. "e Committee on Employment and Social A#airs have been intelligent in their analysis of this topic. For in-

employment and social a!airs > “Now is the autumn of industrial discontent: In reaction to unrest and strikes in Belgium and France over pension reform, how should Europe seek to assess employment relations legislation to find the best balance for workers, employers and society?” By Marie Dromey.


stance, they have noted the existence of current legislation in this area, such as the Cologne process, which aims to encourage dialogue between all the par-ties involved in macroeconomic policy, as well as strengthening con!dence, in order to encourage growth and job cre-ation. "e EMPL resolution also takes into account factors such as the “De-pendency Ratio”, the failures of the Bo-logna Declaration, and also the general disparity between welfare allowances between EU Member States, candidate states and other European countries. Identifying problems is all very well and good but, when push comes to shove,

we need solutions. "e Committee on Employment and Social A#airs stand by current bodies and legislation com-pletely, either asking for enforcement or some slight tweaking. "is resolu-tion keeps the people themselves at the central point of the debate at all times. I do have to wonder though, is a $at level of Corporation Tax really going to do much to solve anything?

"is resolution has high hopes: identi-fying several problem areas, and it can fairly be said that the committee really got into the nitty gritty of the issue re-garding the assessment of employment legislation. "e skeptic in me stays

true, however, and I can’t quiet down the voice within me that questions the power of words like urging, suggests, en-courages and recommends. What if there are deeper root causes which had led to so much ine#ective legislations and if so, what will the impact of this resolu-tion be? –md

Hard Facts,Soft Words


We are all waiting for China to over-take us. "e economic giant of the east is rapidly gaining footholds through-out the world, from Asia to the United States and even Africa. By now, it is blatantly obvious that it is no longer a question of whether, but of when – and judging by the unprecedented rate at which China is growing, that when is soon.

A healthy trade relationship with China is indispensable on two levels. First of all, western businesses are heavily re-liant on export opportunities in the growing Chinese markets. More impor-tantly however, our entire lifestyle is ut-terly dependent on Chinese products,

from the clothes we wear to the food we eat. "ere is no secret as to why China’s capability for competitive export prices is unparalleled: China’s own brand of state-made capitalism has none of the restrictions our western ones enjoy – human rights.

"e Chinese government is as blatant as it is unapologetic about their disre-gard for the human rights. Can we ac-cept that? Do we have to lay down our conscience at the door when we go into trade discussions? With careful consid-eration of Chinese culture, the Com-mittee on Foreign A#airs I constructed a resolution rife with compromise.

At the heart of the resolution is a lesson in cultural relativity. Despite our con-sideration of human rights as universal, they are far from an unconditional in China, and AFET I changed the ques-tion at hand from how we can bring human rights to China to whether the Chinese – the Party aside – actually want them. "e result: a carefully bal-anced attempt at manoevring the dif-ferent and di%cult goals of promoting trade, encouraging human rights and respecting the sovreignty of the Chi-nese.

Having identi!ed cultural di#erences as a key issue, their innovation in-cluded the idea of a “Sino-European

foreign a!airs i > “In the spirit of the Nobel Peace Prize? With China as the EU’s second largest two-way trading partner, how should Europe seek to negotiate future agreements with China whilst seeking to promote and respect human rights?” By Sophie Debrunner Hall.

In Bed Withthe Dragon?


Youth Parliament“ and encouragement of student exchange programs, whilst the rest of the resolution focussed on a conciliatory approach to human rights promotion within trade discussions – David Cameron was often cited as a good example of this. In their eyes, only discussion with the government can bring us further, as seen in clause 3: “any decision taken regarding the human rights situation in the People’s Republic of China must be enacted in cooperation with the People’s Republic of China’s government”. Batting down foreign governments and non-govern-mental organisations, AFET I takes no prisoners in cosying up to the Chinese authorities.

"is realism is refreshing. So often in EYP, the debates and the resolutions which ensue are what can be euphe-mistically called visionary. Or, in other words, impossible. Here we have a reso-lution which not only brings the new angle of cultural di#erence into what was a straightforward ping-pong be-tween trade and human rights, but also takes a clear and pragmatic decision – perhaps a tip of the hat to the Chinese pragmaticism they discussed at length? On that, I wholeheartedly commend them.

However, I do wonder whether they are a little too comfy in bed with the Chinese government. Despite special

mention of the corruption which is rife throughout the upper and especially lower echelons of Chinese politics, they massively restrict their playing !eld for human rights action by agreeing only to act with the approval of a regime which has proven itself completely devoid of interest in human rights. "en again, a harder line might further alienate not only government but also people and (mis?)interpreted as neo-colonialism. –sh

“So often in EYP, the debates and the resolutions

which ensue are what can be euphemistically

called visionary. Or, in other words, impossible.”


"e de!nition of communication may be simple. It is about expressing one’s views. What is not so simple, howev-er, is explaining the di#ering methods of communication. In EYP, there are many di#erent methods of communi-cation, and it is important that – as you progress through the session – you un-derstand what methods are important during and after the session.

You as International Session delegates are experts of verbal communication. You have all been selected, through one mean or another, based upon your abil-ity to discuss and argue. You will all be aware of the importance of personal expression, be it formal or informal. In the past couple of days, you have all been challenged. You have had to pre-sent yourselves verbally, and your fellow delegates have formed opinions of you based on your ability to communicate.

As the session continues, the impor-tance of communication will only in-tensify as the General Assembly com-mences. "e tone, manner and tempo of the speeches and points made will be important. "e success of your resolu-tion will depend upon your clarity and presence.

When the session !nishes, verbal com-munication in this context will come to an end. In the vast majority of cases, most of you will not talk to each other face to face for some time. "e friend-ships you make will, however, probably remain – enabled by a variety of meth-ods of communication. "e unmis-takable communication method is of course Facebook. You will all be aware of this, and the EYP does indeed make use of it – most session groups gather hundreds of members. It is useful to join such groups even before sessions

begin as you can communicate and get acquainted with people before you have even met face to face.

"e most o%cial form of communica-tion in the EYP are undoubtedly web-sites. Most National Committees of the EYP have their own websites. In the UK, for example, we operate a fully op-erational website through which we are able to communicate to our alumni on a large scale. If you choose to continue in EYP, it is important for you to in-vestigate the websites of your respective National Committees. "is way, you will most probably be the !rst to know about new opportunities in EYP.

It is up to you to communicate with others in EYP. If verbal communica-tion is not possible then there are other ways, for communication only works for those who work at it. –db

eyp > Dan Brown explores the modern ways of keeping in touch.

It Is Goodto Talk

!"#$%&'()*+,%"-$%.**/%01/2*2%.3%,"*%41'(&*-/%5(66#$$#(/7%!"#$%&1.8#+-,#(/%'*08*+,$%,"*%9#*:$%(/83%(0%,"*%-1,"(';%-/2%,"*%5(66#$$#(/%+-//(,%.*%"*82%'*$&(/$#.8*%0('%-/3%1$*%:"#+"%6-3%.*%6-2*%(0%,"*%#/0('6-,#(/%+(/,-#/*2%,"*'*#/7%

THE EXTRAORDINARY INTERNATIONAL SESSION IN LILLEHAMMER IS SUPPORTED BY:

THE LILLEHAMMER REGIONAL COUNCIL

INTERNATIONAL PARTNER

Fahrenheit - Issue 2

Documents

Transcript of Fahrenheit - Issue 2