Blueprint - First issue

Dear delegates, lovely officials. On behalf of Blueprint Press Team I would like to welcome you to the Marburg Academic Forum 2014.During the next five days in Vilnius, strangers will get to know each

other better and will work on serious issues of the European Union. These unique moments have to be captured and the session participants have to be entertained constantly. Throughout the session will do its best to feed you with academic input by newspapers and topic days. Our topic days will be presented vis flipcharts in the entrence of the youth hostel. Not to forget that we will make the session unforgettable through photos and videos.You will be able to see all of the input on facebook either on the Session Page or through #MarburgIF

Give a lot to the session and try to get the most out of it. Enjoy!

Peyman Khaljani (DE)Editor of the Session

Members of Blueprint:

Peyman Khaljani (DE) - EditorKira Lange (DE) - Video-Editor

Manon Lynn Schürch - (CH) - JournalistGustaf Westin (SE) - JournalistFania Christodoulides (CY) - JournalistYannick Weber (CH) - JournalistAleksandra Gajewska (PL) - JournalistPaul Sander (DE) - JournalistIrmak Ekin Karel (TR) - Journalist

Erasmus‘ Death 1-2

Cast as the Lead: Vladimir “Vladimirovich“ Putin (AFET) 3-4

An almost “self-fulfilling Prophecy“ 5

Will we see the Light? 6

How to kill a good Idea 7-8

Women and Science: A Love Story? (FEMM) 9-10

Dystopian Reality: Are we ending up in the Hunger Games11-12

When a System Fails (TRAN) 13-14

Europe‘s Seperation Conflicts effecting us? 15-16

The Graduate Illusion (CULT) 17-18

The European Dream 19-20

Shooting for the Stars! (EMPL) 21-22

Burqa or Mini-Skirt? 23-24

The EU Patent Package: Defective or Flawlece? (JURI) 25-26

Relations between Switzerland and the European Union were unex-pectedly challenged, when the Swiss

electorate voted for the adoption of a con-troversial amendment to their constitution in a popular vote. The proposal, launched by the right-wing populist Swiss People’s Party, established a ceiling on the number of immigrants, conjuring up the vision of a country bursting at the seams.

The apparent afflictions caused by popula-tion growth, backed by statistics on urban sprawl and traffic congestion with a some-what scanty correlation to immigration, ma-naged to convince a razor-sharp majority of 50.3% of the voters to accept the proposal. The collapse of Swiss health, education and transport systems might have been preven-ted, as the initiators believe, but by chal-lenging free movement, Switzerland has endangered the 2002 bilateral agreements upon which the country’s relation to the EU is built. With the EU calling the free move-ment of persons a ‚non-negotiable’ princi-ple linked to mutual market access, it is un-clear which path future relations will take; negotiations for an institutional framework were suspended just after the result of the vote was announced.

Contrary to the initiator’s expectations, February 9th swiftly led to concrete con-sequences. The EU announced the exclu-sion of Switzerland from the multi-billion euro research programme Horizon2020 and

Erasmus+, a European education fund pri-marily aimed at facilitating student mobili-ty within Europe. Switzerland had partici-pated in these EU-programmes since 2011, and whereas recent negotiations have led to a possible agreement allowing the country to partially re-join Horizon 2020 already in September, Switzerland is expected to stay classified as a third state in the Erasmus+ programme with very limited and expen-sive participation opportunities: Erasmus is dead for Swiss students. The EU’s reaction came as a surprise to many, as there is only little apparent relation between the prospec-tive end to freedom of movement of EU citizens in Switzerland and pan-European cooperation in the fields of research and education. The Swiss government hastily made replacement funds available for stu-dent mobility, but Youth organisations who could rely on Erasmus+-money in the past are facing major funding gaps. Whether the EU’s reaction to the Swiss vote is appropri-ate as long as the concrete implementation of the initiative “against mass immigration” in national legislation is still pending, re-mains highly questionable.

The result of the vote has left the country divided. The French speaking part of Swit-zerland had rejected the initiative with a vast majority, but overwhelming acceptance in other regions lead to the close result. Dis-content with the outcome, protesters mar-ched in most major cities under the unoffi-cial slogan “we are the 49.7 per

On February 9th 2014 the Swiss electorate accepted the popular initiative ‘against mass immi-gration’. Despite the pending implementation of the constitution’s new articles, Switzerland is facing consequences.

erasmus‘ DeathBy Yannick Weber (Ch)

1

cent” after the vote was announced. In par-ticular, the exclusion of Switzerland from the Erasmus+ programme and the insuffici-ent interim-solution has left many enraged, but there are voices arguing that Switzer-land should not depend on European fun-ding mechanisms, and that the country had also prospered before the bilateral treaties with the EU were signed. The Swiss Feder-al government however has no intention of cancelling these treaties granting important economic advantages for Swiss firms and laying the foundation for cooperation in nu-merous fields. But the EU’s future course of action currently remains subject to specula-tion as negotiations are ongoing.

Admittedly, the outcome of the vote has also been met with appreciation. Italian Member of the European Parliament Mario Borghezio, repeatedly convicted for racial-ly motivated offences, waved a Swiss flag during a debate on future EU-Swiss bila-

teral relations in the European Parliament and leaders of Europe’s right-wing populist parties such as Marine Le Pen of the French National Front and Geert Wilders of the Dutch Party for Freedom have congratu-lated Switzerland for the decision. Invigo-rated by the encouragement of their newly found friends, the Swiss People’s Party is currently making plans to abolish most of Switzerland’s asylum law.

While it is unclear when the diplomatic tensions between Switzerland and the EU will be resolved and what future relations might look like, the debate on immigration in Switzerland continues: a popular initiati-ve seeking to limit immigration to 0.2% of the current resident population a year has been submitted and will be voted upon this November. Quite possibly, Switzerland’s foreign relations might await even frostier times. ■

above: “Excess is harm”: Advertisement for the Swiss People’s Party’s popular initiative against mass immigration

background: Erasmus of Rotterdam on a painting by Hans Holbein: What might the name patron of the EU’s educational programmes think of Swiss voters?

2

Even though the EU and Russia re-peatedly had divergent viewpoints in terms of international politics, they

needed each other’s economies, and thus, established trade links, which endured “in-ter alia” the Russo-Georgian War and con-flict in Syria. However, Russia went even further and her aggression on Ukraine could not remain unanswered. Hours of dialogue with the Russian president, during which he seemed to hear, but not listen, proved to be ineffective and the death of almost 300 civi-lians from neutral states was needed to ap-

peal to economy, which speaks louder than words.

Sanctions as an economic measure of politi-cal pressure, also proved not to be effective enough though. Most of the EU Member States reckoned that such a decisive measu-re would scare Putin to death making him harmless, and consequently restoring peace in Europe. Apparently, while thinking about Russia we have to set aside our western pa-radigms and prepare for the unpredictable. One thing needs to be clarified. Russia is

Cast as the leaD: VlaDimir “VlaDimiroViCh“ putin (aFet)By Aleksandra Gajewska (PL)

3

not a fully democratic European country with similar values as Europe represents. It will not be acting as an EU Member State would.

While the EU is tangled in multi-faceted democratic procedures, Putin can almost immediately put any idea from his mind straight into practice. Let’s be frank, his authority could be compared to the po-wer of a dictator. Moreover, the support for Russian president is constantly rising, drawing near to 90%. The society seems to, not merely, tolerate his unquestioned rule, but expect such strength in action. We constantly hear voices, which openly des-pise “the Western world” and articulate the will to rebuild might similar to the one the USSR had.

From a rational point of view, facing sanc-tions and a global indignation, Putin should step back, as his aggression in Ukraine be-comes unprofitable. But who said that he is indeed acting rationally? When it comes to our relations with Russia, we are constantly encountering paradoxes. Instead of retreat Putin’s answer to sanctions is … sanctions, although as experts say this double-bladed weapon will hurt Russia, or rather Russian citizens, even more than it hurts Western exporters. Again, Putin turns the tables. Ne-glecting the economic influence of his deci-sions on Russians, he acts as if it was him, who struggled to neutralise the activity of the West, not the other way round. Startlin-gly, he converts the situation in such a way, that an ordinary Russian comprehends that it is not the EU, pointing the finger at Rus-sia, but the Russian president punishing us for disturbing him.

This does not indicate that implementing sanctions was a mistake, but illustrates the mechanism of Putin’s actions and how he is creating his own image in the sense of

propaganda. Russia‘s president is simply an extremely good actor. Even though the European audience can feel slightly con-fused, the vast majority of Russians enjoy the show and the worship for their idol is mirrored in the polls. Now, Putin is also a director and thus, the EU should carefully consider all possible scenarios putting an emphasis on the ener-gy independence from Russia. This crisis marks also an important trial for the Euro-pean solidarity, which is undoubtedly cru-cial for the EU to be perceived as a strong, united entity on the international scene. Maybe the EU should give specific incen-tive to break existing sense of insecurity. Maybe such stimulus could be a creation of a common sanctions compensation fund, which would make the Member States feel financially more secure, and consequently the whole EU politically more decisive.

Notwithstanding, it is high time to reali-se that the game is no more centred on the highest profit from trade. Not only we have to switch our thinking about bilateral rela-tions from the win-win account, towards which global trade accustomed us, to loose-loose balance, which is the sanctions con-sequence. But above all, the EU has to be conscious that Putin poses a threat to the in-ternational security, the threat so enormous that it could affect each of us. ■

4

an almost “selF-FulFilling propheCy“By Paul Sander (De)

Back in 1989, „Back to the Future Part 2“

introduced a huge in-ternational audience to its vision of what life and technology would look like in 2015. Di-rector and writer Ro-bert Zemeckis never had any hopes of ac-curately predicting the future, saying „[...] rather than trying to make a scientifically sound prediction that we were probably going to get wrong anyway, we figured, let‘s just make it funny!“. So, when he dreamt up a time in which flying cars peace-fully co-existed with fax machines he most certainly got some wires crossed. However, fans of the film grew up to become clever scientists instilled with an urgent need for “Hoverboards”. Even though their work could be deemed irrational, these scientists came far in making fiction become reality.

At the time of its release, floating high-speed skateboards appealed hugely to viewers and especially kids. The call for such a toy was at its peak met by rumours, that Mattel had already produced “Hoverboards” but held them back due to parental safety concerns. That already, is a notable accomplishment for a fictitious skateboard-bar-the-wheels. More recently, a hoax trailer for “HUVr Tech”, a real live Hoverboard, went viral stirring the hopes of many fans. Ultima-tely just a rouse for the internet company “funny or die”, the video showed one more time the power of the Hoverboard-hype.

Showing that this pu-blic interest is a huge influence on science, there are also many legitimate attemp-ts to create a Hover-board. Most notably among them are, a bit different to the con-cept presented in the

film, a for-sale, aquatic flying board and the “Mag surf” an actual magnetically ho-vering device! Unfortunately, the “Mag surf” needs a magnetic rail-road to float and in the film Hoverboards ironically never worked on water in the first place. Long story short, all attempts up to now have been falling short of the enticing con-cept presented in the film. Hoverboards are still a long road away from happening.

Nevertheless, there is still some time un-til the 21st of October 2015, so you may keep on believing that an actual Hover-board might yet be discovered! And even if they prove to never be happening, NIKE recently announced to introduce Marty McFly‘s self-lacing shoe-technology in 2015. A smaller case for the progress of science but at least some prove to dreams of high-futuristic technology happening now. In addition, it is also a considerable amount of consolation for any and eve-ry Hoverboard-enthusiast depressed by the current scientific prospects. For now, we are left with revisiting the expecta-tions we personally held a couple of ye-ars, if not decades, back and comparing them to today. How many of them manage to get back to you – back to the future? ■

5

Imagine a world without artificial light. The glare from your computer screen, the cosy blur of a bedside lamp, the glow

from your mobile phone being nonexistent. Natural gas, oil and coal have all run out. Our wasteful habits have caught up to us and the darkness remains mysterious.

Travel into the future 80 years from now. The planet has run out of fossil fuels and it will take millions upon millions of years to replenish them. Poor planning in Europe’s past means that its citizens are left without basic necessities such as heat and light. One could say that it is too late to change the human race’s bleak outcome.

The committee on Industry, Research and Energy’s task during the session in Mar-burg is to prevent our energy-less future as predicted if we do not clean up our act. We need to become energy independent, and move away from fossil-fuels to more envi-ronmentally friendly and sustainable ener-gy. However, we have known what needs to be done for quite some time now, so why are Member States failing to reach the 20-20-20 goals? We have a dependency of 53.8% on foreign imports, and of this, the EU brings in 34% of its natural gas and ne-arly one third of its oil solely from Russia. Too many of our eggs are in one basket.

With top research facilities, why can we not find solutions to our everyday energy needs? Is it just a matter of pumping money into environmental studies for renewable fuels? Or is it an issue of weak energy po-licies?

Otherwise, is it simply the fact that we have energy policies and environmental legislati-on but Member States arefailing to comply?

The amount of fossil fuels which remain in Europe is finite. Therefore, we must use the non-renewable sources we have at present carefully. Pan-European initiatives such as energy networks connecting Member States which can regulate distribution proportio-nally in case of emergencies have not been achieved on a large scale. In addition to this, smart grids are yet to be constructed. However, we know that our focus switch to target sustainable sources of energy. The European Commission needs to have a de-finite direction for the European Renewable Energy Fund and the European Efficiency Fund, especially when it comes to new pro-jects. Nevertheless, we cannot predict ur-gent situations, so it is vital that Directive 2009/119/EC which obliges Member States to maintain minimum stocks of crude oil and/or petroleum products, is re-enforced. Presently, there is a sensitive balance which must be maintained between renewable and non-renewable sources in Europe. Our de-pendency on other nations for imports puts us at risk in other areas, such as foreign po-licy. It is time to take action and advance research, but will we see the light in time? Or will it be too late? ■

Will We see the light? (itre)By Fania Christodoulides (CY)

6

hoW to Kill a gooD iDeaBy Gustaf Westin (se)

It was in 2010 that the app-based cab ser-vice Uber’s first taxi took to the road and transported its first passenger, and since

then, the service has expanded and enjo-yed success all over the world. By using an app for IPhones or Android, passengers can simply order a cab on their phone, seeing a picture of a background checked driver before the cab arrives. Payment, of which Uber takes a 20% fee, is automated, and is simply withdrawn from the account you re-gistered in the app. Because of this, and the fact that passengers can check the route via a map in the phone’s app, the risk of getting ripped off is substantially lower. Passengers and drivers can also rate one another after the drive, resulting in sexist, rude or other-wise bad drivers not getting rides, and an-noying or intolerable customers not getting lifts. Drivers can also sign up for as little or as much work as they want, and on top of all this, Uber is often significantly cheaper than other services.

It is a system that truly works for everyone; drivers get a simple and flexible cloud sys-tem they can use for management and bil-

ling, and consumers get a good service with little chance of getting cheated. Seemingly, a real win-win situation.

And yet, wherever Uber has gone, it has met fierce resistance in the form of protests and a minefield of old regulations and rules, sometimes making it very difficult for the company to offer its services. When the competition from Uber proved too tough for the two main established cab compa-nies in Brussels for example, the regional government effectively banned the service, with the regional transport minister vaguely referring to risks of Uber drivers not having inadequate insurance, concerns that are not even necessary, since Uber always makes sure driver’s and the cars they drive are ade-quately insured and safe. In Washington DC the government complained Uber cars were taking passengers across state borders, so-mething which is not permitted. Vancouver demanded Uber raise the cost for a drive to the equivalent of over 30 Euros, regardless of time or distance. Others have expressed concerns about a higher risk of customers getting assaulted, but that can happen in

7

normal taxis as well. In an Uber cab the passenger even has a better safety net, in the form of concrete GPS data of where an assault happened, as well as the possibility to track a driver and block them from the system.

The most odd of measures Uber has en-countered, however, were those which they were faced with in the city of Paris. Uber drivers are forbidden by law to pick up cu-stomers within a distance less than a 15 mi-nute car drive. Consequently, if a driver is two minutes away from a customer in Paris, the driver has to stand still and wait for 13 minutes before he can take the customer to his or her destination.

When hearing of Brussel’s decision to ban Uber, Neelie Kroes, the Vice President of the European Commission and Commissioner for Digital Agenda, stated: “This decision is not about protecting or helping passengers – it‘s about protecting a taxi cartel”. Afraid of losing all their customers to newer and better services based on newer technology, old and established cab companies have gone on the offensive, and started lobbying for bureaucratic obstacles to be put in the

way of innovative companies such as Uber. In cities like London, Madrid and Barcelo-na, cab drivers have cut off, barricaded and blocked busy streets to protest against Uber, while in Paris, unionised drivers followed the French tradition of grand protests by smashing up and destroying the windows of taxis using the service.

What has happened to Uber is a sad, yet good example of how old regulations and protectionism can be a formidable obstacle for technology, innovations and new com-petition. This is what happens when people decide not to embrace new technology and not to compete on quality, not to respect the choice of customers, and desperately try to keep their old privileges. Hopefully, ser-vices like such are here to stay, and Uber will weather the storm that is now upon it. Luckily, more and more American cities are starting to legalise the service. As good news as this may be, Uber has only been capable of this because it had the resources, popularity and the strength enough to fight back. How many other entrepreneurs have had to give up their dreams because they could not? ■

8

Why is it that so many talented and well-educated women cannot advance to the top and take over

a leadership position? What are the reasons for their sudden disappearance out of the scientific working field and what should be done to win over those women for a perma-nent and stable career in science?

Despite the fact that educational establish-ments, such as high schools today keep the gender balance in mind and try to uphold an equal chance for both men and women to join into scientific studies, the scientific elite in all over Europe is mainly composed of males. Even if the percentage of female scientists in leadership positions has signi-ficantly increased, the amount is still less than the one at universities. Next to one’s personal biography, there is a vast amount of many different reasons existing why the potential of excellent and well-educated women remains untapped. Various results deriving from elite research programs in-dicate that gifted girls and young women hardly experience the motivation from their friends and family enabling them to syste-matically expand their abilities and invest time and effort to pursue a future profes-sion in science. It happens more and more that parents often moderate their daughters’ enthusiasm for a subject that in the eyes of many people is considered a pure male do-minated field of work. Such parents would try and support their daughters in being mo-

dest, well-behaved and adapted.

Another problem in our society can be found in the continuous effort to match up with today’s ideal of beauty. Women who are not trying to follow the norm and are not trying to fit in with other groups are being discriminated. Being labelled as a “nerd” or a “geek” is only one amongst many reasons why there are not enough fe-males in today’s scientific labour market. Why is it that gifted women all over Europe have to be afraid of embracing their scien-tific interest and future in that field? After all, women take up more positions in Bi-ology (65%) and Architecture (55%). Ho-wever, the world of science is still mainly a male dominated field; however, women will have to deal with much more challen-ges than men in the same position.

Women anD sCienCe: a loVe story? (Femm)By Manon Lynn Schürch (CH)

Why is it that so many talented and well-educated women cannot advance to the top and take over a leadership position? What are the reasons for their sudden disappearance out of the sci-entific working field and what should be done to win over those women for a permanent and stable career in science?

9

Those female scientists who indeed over-come all those aforementioned obstacles and do reach the academic corporate ladder will be confronted by a strict organisational structure of universities and research labs. One good example for existing restricti-ons in the scientific field is family life. In order for every scientist to succeed in his or her profession, he or she must continu-ously be involved in the same or similar scientific research to not lose one’s thread. Having a child puts the mother out of this arrangement in an instant and it is almost impossible to go back and pick up where she has left off. Too much time would have gone by and research would have continued during that time. This shows that the work-life-balance for women is much harder to handle than for men. In order for the EU to secure a woman’s faith in a career in sci-

10

ence, it has to restore this work-life-balance and establish better maternity packages for women so that they do not immediately get discouraged by a future in this field. To cor-rect the current deficit in equality amongst women and men in science, in the future this responsibility will no longer only lay in the hands of the female gender. It is cru-cial that this close-minded mentality and its resulting behaviour of each and every indi-vidual at tertiary institutions with regard to gender equality are being changed for good, by both men and women. Only this realisa-tion and its further establishment of more female scientific career paths at universities serve the development of innovative and ef-fective structures at research facilities. ■

Suzanne Collins’ The Hunger Games and Veronica Roth’s Divergent Trilogies. The famous classics, Huxley’s Brave New World, Orwell’s Animal Farm and 1984, Lois Lowry’s The Gi-ver of the 20th century. Dystopian novels have been popular ever since. But why does every-one love them so much? Suzanne Collins’ The Hunger Games and Veronica Roth’s Divergent Trilogies. The famous classics, Huxley’s Brave New World, Orwell’s Animal Farm and 1984, Lois Lowry’s The Giver of the 20th century. Dystopian novels have been popular ever since. But why does everyone love them so much?

There might be different answers: Maybe they relieve the constant stress we have about the future, or

perhaps we are simply fascinated by the idea of how negative the near future could be – and how many different ways exist that could make the dystopian future become a reality.

Whatever the reason might be. All the an-swers, at the end, have one thing in com-mon: The idea that dystopia can become a reality in a near future. We feel that what is shown to us as a dystopian society - the op-posite of a utopian society – is more likely to be today’s reality than tomorrow’s ficti-on.

Dehumanisation, environmental disaster and oppressive societal control are common characteristics of dystopian novels and they do not sound unfamiliar at all. If we have a look at today’s world we can actually dis-cover more and more advances in genetic engineering, new fertilization techniques, a development of CCTV cameras, NSA, mi-litary drones, drugs and consumption. Thus, they bring up the question: Has dystopia al-ready become our reality?

A personal-genomics company in Califor-nia has been awarded a broad U.S. patent for a technique that could be used in a fer-tility clinic to create babies with selected traits, as the frontiers of genetic enhance-ment continue to advance. In theory, this technique could be used to create so-known “designer babies”. Parents who want babies with blue eyes and not brown eyes, black hair and not blond hair, and athletic and not frail would be able to create their perfect dream-baby which would have the traits and characteristics that its parents choose from a catalogue and later order. Comparing this with the ‘Brave New World’, where natu-ral reproduction has been shut down and children are created, „decanted“, raised in „hatcheries and conditioning centres“ and given special traits that put them into their socio-economic castes, Huxley’s dystopian

Dystopian reality: are We enDing up in the hunger games? By Irmak Ekin Karel (TR)

11

idea of bottled babies does not seem inac-curate at all. Furthermore, it would be appropriate to de-clare that the “Big Brother” of 1984 is, in-deed, watching us. Closed-circuit television (CCTV) cameras are positioned all around the world, producing images or recordings for surveillance purposes. Especially in big cities like New York and London there are cameras on every street corner. Not to men-tion all the personal information we display on social networking websites it should not pose difficulties for the governments to keep an eye on us whenever they like to. On a more serious note, a lot of people, du-ring depression tend to consume not just il-legal but also legal drugs like Prozac, Xan-ax and Adderall instead of coping with their emotions and dealing with the fact why they need drugs in the first place.

This coheres with “Brave New World”, where people regularly consume a drug cal-led “Soma” to suppress their negative fee-lings and make them feel happy again.Also, a lot of people nowadays cannot get enough of short-term relationships, sex and more and thus they tend to treat them like clothes. This pretty much overlaps with the dystopian idea of dehumanisation, where people are pushed to feel less and consume more.

To conclude, one thing is clear: Dystopian novels are drawing attention to real-world issues regarding society, environment, po-litics, morals, ethnics and technology and if unaddressed, these issues could actually lead to a worst-case Hunger Games scena-rio. ■

12

When Eyjafjallajökull erupted, it did so underneath glacial ice, which caused the ice to melt, in

turn causing melting water from the glacier to chill the lava from the eruption quickly. This caused the lava to fragment into ex-tremely fine particles of silica and ash that were then lifted into the ash plume. When flying a plane through an ash cloud such as the one after the eruption of Eyjafjallajö-kull, you run the risk of damaging the sur-face of the plane, including the wind-shield, forcing pilots to rely only on their instru-

ments. Since sensors can be blocked by the ash, instruments might not always be fully reliable however. Any cavities or holes on the surface of the plane, including the engi-ne, also run the risk of getting filled up with ash. All this makes it potentially dangerous for planes to fly through ash clouds.

In response to the eruption, one European country after the other started to close down their airspace to commercial flights, resul-ting in millions of passengers either getting stranded in airports or rushing to train and

When a system Fails (tran)By Gustaf Westin (SE)

It was in late Spring of 2010 that the Icelandic volcano Eyjafjallajökull erupted, and created a massive cloud of ash that slowly and steadily spread over Europe and one of the world’s busi-est airspaces. Very fine particles released from the eruption were carried into the plume and made it difficult or impossible for aircraft to fly through it. This led to the largest air traffic shut down since World War II, a shut down that, according to some, could have been preven-ted if Europe’s air traffic systems would have been better prepared, better organised, and more centralised.

13

bus stations all over Europe, and around the world, as flights to and from Europe were also cancelled. The shut-down lasted between the 15th and the 23rd of April for most countries with sporadic closures from time to time afterwards, and let to the can-cellation of over 100.000 flights. The In-ternational Air Transport Association, the IATA, estimated the total loss of the airline industry to around 1.3 billion Euros, around 150 million per day of closed airspace.

Even our own organisation was affected by the shutdown. The 63rd International Ses-sion of the European Youth Parliament in Tromsø, Norway, was scheduled to take place between the 16th and 25th of April 2010. Due to the extraordinary situation and the ensuing air traffic chaos, only 35 delegates made it to the session. Partici-pants who did make it to the session say the session turned out a great experience in the end after all, but the fact remains; the vol-cano eruption, or our authorities inability to handle the situation better, deprived many EYPers of what could have been their best session experience to date.

Following the air traffic crisis, many air-line and travel companies facing millions of Euros in losses directed heavy criticism towards national authorities for being over-ly cautious and not being able to handle the situation in a good way, criticism against

which national authorities defended them-selves by stating the seriousness of the si-tuation and the potential danger of flying when not knowing the exact ramifications of flying through ash.

Some took the crisis as a sign of how the Single European Sky (SES), an initiative launched in 2004 by the European Com-mission that aims to harmonise and cen-tralise European air traffic control, was not being implemented fast enough, and lit a fire under the work with implementing the SES. At the time, the European Commis-sioner for Transport, Siim Kallas stated: „We need a single European regulator for a single European sky. Stronger European co-ordination will not solve every problem. But faced with such a pan-European crisis, it would have enabled a much more agile response.”

Even today however, more than four years later, the implementation of the SES is still lagging behind. The slow implementation is partly due to many national governments’ unwillingness to relinquish control of their airspace, partly due to a lack of leadership, and partly due to few penalties for not mee-ting requirements, depending on who you ask. If Eyjafjallajökull would begin to stir again, would we be better prepared than last time, or is more crisis and chaos to be expected? ■

14

europe’s seperation ConFliCts eFFeCting us?By Fania Christodoulides (Cy)

We, as students, live in a bubble of a continuous cycle. Waking up, studying, eating, sleeping and

largely repeating that. The monotony of this cycle is fuelled by, what most consider to be, the sequence of life. Primary school, secondary school, tertiary education and the following occupation. Normally, we fail to realise that current events and conflicts wi-thin European states can actually effect us in an immediate way, consequently distur-bing our progression.

In less than a month, on the 18th of Sep-tember 2014, the people of Scotland will be voting on a referendum, granted by the agreement of the United Kingdom go-vernment. They will be asked a seemingly sim-ple question: “Should Scotland be an inde-pendent country?” This will hopefully end the ongoing discussions of the region’s in-dependence from the United Kingdom. Ho-wever, if we are not actually from Scotland, how does this directly affect us? The an-swer lies in our 28-nation union. If Scotland cedes from the UK, will it still be a member of the European Union or will it become a third- country nation?

If the Scots decide on remaining a part of Great Britain, then for the rest of Europe,

everything remains relatively the same. Ho-wever, if Scotland declares independence two scenarios arise. Scotland could imme-diately become the 29th state of the Europe-an Union – or they could become a non- EU member state, which will be forced to reap-ply for membership. What most of us do not realise, is the effects of Scotland not being a member. Apart from free trade being an issue, our tuition fees for universities in Scotland potentially may not be waived if European students are classed differently to Scottish students. Currently, Europeans pay

the exact same amount as the Scots - nothing. Yet English students, who are classed dif-ferently, pay around 9,000 pounds per year, to receive the same studies in Scotland. Apart from the fees, studying in a non-EU mem-

ber state will require for us to obtain stu-dent visas, and loans for living expenses will be harder to acquire as well. Study ab-road programmes may also become scarcer, as burdensome regulations increase. As of early August 2014, the “Yes” polls in the re-ferendum fluctuated from 45-54%, making this vote too close to call. Subsequently, the fact that there is no clear answer to whether or not Scotland will remain part of the EU upon independence is extremely frighte-ning.Another conflict, which sometimes cor

15

Another conflict, which sometimes cor-relates to the Scottish independence, is Catalonia’s push for separation from Spain. Like in Scotland, the referendum will take place this autumn, and will ask the Catalo-nians “Do you want Catalonia to become an independent State?” However, the Spanish Government has not recognised this ballot and will try to obstruct it from taking place on the 9th of November 2014. In additi-on to this, the European Commission has clearly declared that if Catalonia seceded, they would automatically leave the EU and become a third- country nation, and EU tre-aties would no longer apply to the new in-dependent state. Due to surveys conducted in March 2014, up to 59.6% of Catalonians want independence, so the likelihood of the region’s discharge from the EU is signifi-cant.

Therefore, with Catalonian independence, our free migration will cease to exist, and as a result studying in places such as Bar-celona will be much more difficult, as well as study abroad programmes might become sparse. Moreover, we would not be able to use our common currency, the Euro, in Ca-talonia anymore, which will create a hassle, albeit small, if we wanted to visit the region.

It is interesting to see how European con-flicts regarding autonomy do directly affect us, but in our little bubble we tend not to notice. Much of what the European Union has given us, we now take for granted. Most of us cannot remember the time when we needed visas, passports and currency con-verters to simply visit another country wi-thin Europe. The referendums in Scotland and Catalonia, with possibility of partition, remind us that what sometimes seems to be none of our concern, can actually change a lot in a unified Europe, thus bursting our little bubble. ■

16

With the OECD proclaiming that economic success is based on increasing tertiary education,

the EU’s political goal of aiming for more university graduates is widely accepted. France and Spain for example have long surpassed the target of 40% set out by the Europe 2020 goals. But surprisingly, these are also the countries struggling with some of the highest youth unemployment rates of 23% for France and a troubling 53% for Spain. Unemployment is not only affecting the under-qualified, also university gradu-ates have difficulties entering the job mar-ket. According to a current EU estimate, more than a fifth of all Europeans holding a university degree are working a job that does not require tertiary education.

The EU Education Council noted in its Fe-bruary meeting that graduates’ skills often do not match employers’ expectations. But instead of questioning the trend of upgra-ding education even in fields such as nur-sing. The Education Ministers want univer-sities to equip their students with skills such as negotiating and entrepreneurial ability, instead of striving for academic excellence. What the policy makers thereby fail to re-cognise is that not every set of skills can be acquired in a lecture or the classroom. The job of a plumber is simply not a graduate profession.

Indisputably, Switzerland’s economy is amongst the busiest and most success-ful in Europe with a youth unemployment rate of 7%. Remarkably, only 27% of the

the graDuate illusion (Cult)By Yannick Weber (CH)

One of the five headline targets of the EU’s 2020 goals is to increase the percentage of 30-34 year olds completing third level education to at least 40%. This quota, however, is anything but worthy of aspiring towards.

17

country’s inhabitants have completed terti-ary education. The vast majority of young people completes a 3 to 4-year apprentice-ship, which includes state-regulated voca-tional training at a company and accom-panying schooling. This system creates a unique skill match, as the private sector is involved in young people’s training and many apprentices continue working where they were trained. Apprenticeships cover a wide spectrum from very basic to rather demanding occupations, enabling the sys-tem to accommodate most young people. The success of the Swiss economy largely builds on this workforce. Due to the rela-tively small number of university graduates and the possibility to still complete a tertia-ry education after an apprenticeship, unem-ployment among graduates is very rare in Switzerland. Apart from Austria, Germany and Denmark no EU-country knows a si-milar system. In Italy for example, where 75% of young people reach a baccalaureate, there is not even vocational training leading to an officially recognised degree, causing a dramatic lack of craftspeople.

But instead of learning from its neighbour, the EU unquestioningly follows the rea-soning of the OECD. The latter bases its call for more university-level-education on studies which found that people holding a university degree on average earn more mo-ney. The OECD does not take into conside-ration though, that there are other reasons to the correlation, such as intelligence or dili-gence, and that it cannot be extrapolated in-definitely – simply equipping more people with a degree does not miraculously lead to economic growth.

By decreasing the hurdles for a university degree, the academic level of any course will automatically decrease as well. If a course is no longer tailored to the needs and the intellectual potential of the top 20%, but the top half, educational quality for the for-mer group will be significantly lower. Uni-versities should be the place where many of the thinkers and innovators of tomorrow are educated, they do not teach to a job. But a society does not only need thinkers, it also needs people who can work and create va-lue. And mediocre thinkers are not the peo-ple moving society forward.

Increasing the quota of university graduates at all costs has two major downsides: Not only does it create a mismatch of skills, but it also devalues university courses. If ne-arly half the population holds a university degree, it cannot serve as a certificate of an individual’s competence anymore.

Instead of adopting the Swiss best practice, the EU overly focuses on reaching an ar-bitrarily defined quota of graduates. The more advisable alternative, sadly, is often forgotten. ■

18

the european DreamBy Aleksandra Gajewska (pl)

Lying in her massive bed between Scandinavia and Mediterranean Sea, Europe was fast asleep. Her face was

covered in wrinkles and under a layer of powder an attentive observer could notice scars. Solid and long-awaited sleep brought relief to this old lady, exhausted after a tur-bulent and tragic era, but finally fulfilled.

In front of her eyes appeared her twenty-eight children, holding their hands, smiling, just like shining stars on a cloudless sky. The old Europe sighed with satisfaction seeing them finally united and strong. Dreaming on about shared values on stable founda-tions of democracy, she saw her grandchild-ren. Strong voices of these serious leaders in suits were enunciating laudable aims and elevated ideals. Their determined glances were not accepting any disapproval. She was proud of them, expressing an uncondi-tional affection, which only a grandmother

can have for her grandchild.

In her fantasy, peace and long-lasting se-curity seemed to be unshakable. Oh, poor Europe. So aged and yet so naïve, she does not know that only children believe in fairy tales, that every dream comes to an end and it is time to wake up. Oh, poor, poor Euro-pe. While she was dreaming, a well-known disease, which she herself had experienced some time ago, came back and threatened her. The illness was called i m p e r i a l i s m.

It had been consuming Europe’s children and her friends’ offspring for ages, mirro-ring sense of superiority and human endea-vour to obtain an absolute power. Fratrici-dal wars had lasted for ages. The emperors of the Roman Empire, Mongolian Genghis Khan, Napoleon Bonaparte, British, Spa-nish and French colonisers, and Hitler in his search for “Lebensraum“, they were all linked with imperialism. Some justified themselves, or probably in fact idealistical

No sleeping beauty, no happy ending, but an old lady and a disease. This is the naked truth about Europe.

19

ly believed that they are bringing enlighten-ment to conquered nations, others from the beginning had no illusions about the nature of their conquests. After all, imperialism in every form led to the same miserable end, causing above all destruction and death of native populations. By all means, it turned out not to be a manifestation of philanthro-py, but merely a search for economic bene-fit, maximisation of profits and extension of authority on allegedly inferior nations. This realisation facilitated slow recovery of the nations from this insanity. When they were finally convinced that the nightmare came to an end, the disease reappeared in calcula-ting mind of Eurasia’s grandson, rekindled the desire of dominance and created a con-cept of restoring the old hegemony by the extension of power on independent territo-ries.

While Europe was sleeping, imperialism

had already taken its toll in Georgia and Chechnya. The old lady only shook her head in discontent, but continued dreaming. So the disease lurked waiting for another good moment. When the time came, it displayed its tentacle again, took over Crimea and hid behind supposed will of nation. Now it is preparing to attack eastern Ukraine, which short while ago, was to be adopted by Euro-pe. Behind what will the imperialism hide now? Alleged will to prevent humanitarian disaster, which in fact was caused by the imperialism itself? Or maybe aggression of Ukrainians, who are trying to protect their own country?

Wake up dear Europe until it is too late. Wake up and acknowledge threat. Wake up and unmask hypocrisy, illegal invasion and insane imperialism. ■

20

On 06th August 2014, the European Space Agency (ESA) managed to put the spacec-raft Rosetta into “orbit” around its target co-met named 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko. Rosetta will try to reveal secrets about the origin of our solar system, earth itself and possibly even the origin of life. Funded by European Union Member States, the ESA obviously belongs to the so-called “public sector”. Very unfortunate for Team Science, public funding is at an all time low. Yet, you would not expect a private company to delve into such questions, nor should you,

which leads right to the problem at hand: With waning funding for public scientific output and the limited options of company-sponsored research, how can projects such as spacecraft missions be carried out in the future?

Let me quickly guide you through the diffe-rences between privately and public-spon-sored research to prove the urgency of the changes in progress. Taking a look on its intentions, private scientific output is deter-mined to add or create value and to do so in

shooting For the stars! - hoW all sCienCe Can Be ConDuCteD Without puBliC FunDing (empl)

By Paul Sander (DE)

21

an economically short-term self-sufficient way. Arguably, this makes private research more effective and even efficient by produ-cing high-quality research with an almost immediately positive effect on public wel-fare. Therefore, private research obviously has its place and is very much needed. Yet, there are some distinctive downsides on this specific road to success. Private research needs to follow the trail of money and the-refore only the interests of a relatively weal-thy demographic. Additionally, due to the focus on economic profitability, its efforts concentrate on consumable products and not necessarily on scientific and technolo-gical progress. In contrast, the ESA mission is exemplary for many things, characteristic and admirable in public research. Public funding makes scientific studies less vul-nerable to economic interests, thus aiming it at high academic value. Furthermore, in progress for already over 10 years, Rosettas lift-off took place in 2004, the spacecraft is concrete evidence for the patient long-term effort involved. In short, company-spon-sored research needs to watch its financial profitability, while publicly sponsored ones only need to maximise their scientific gain.

Nevertheless, public institutions are facing a problematic development. Public funding is at a low and private entities offer appea-ling salaries and working conditions to re-searchers, effectively drawing high-level scientists into their sector. It is the combi-nation of both, which is draining public sci-entific output. Unable to compete with the private sector, European science is facing a problem. Sadly, it is not going to just solve itself with a couple of media campaigns to increase public awareness, we need to talk money. Maybe, it is time to just shoot for the stars and come up with far-fetched ideas concerning science and funding. I pitch to you, “crowd-funding” for science. “crowd-funding” might seem like the oldest trick in

the book to some, yet others still have to discover it. And admittedly, projects such as the internationally funded James Webb Space Telescope with an estimated va-lue of 8.8 billion Dollars are far too much to be handled by a bunch of enthusiastic space-friends on the internet. Nevertheless, “crowd-funding” paid for the first publicly accessible space telescope, called ARKYD, in 2013, collecting over 1.5 million Dol-lars via the Internet. Additionally, there are, right in this moment, a great deal of smal-ler scientific projects being active, financed through “kickstarter” and various other sites! Could all our problems be solved so quickly?

Being perfectly honest, I can not really ad-vertise “crowd-funding” as valid alternati-ve to the status quo. There are still many European Member States with a high bud-get for scientific research and some of those commendable lovers of science even raised theirs in the recent past! Neither is the situ-ation already so dire, that we would need such a radical fix. I‘m afraid to tell you, many of the scientific projects financed via “crowd-funding” do not actually aim to ex-pand public knowledge or find cures to di-seases, which were deemed by companies financially not worth their time. They just try to make pets glow in the dark or ask for money to attempt another bound-to-fail go at creating hoverboards out of “Back to the Future 2”.

But ever since Pluto was demoted from its status as a planet, I have been taking an in-terest into the ways and activities of public scientific output. Is it not ever so great to know more? ■

22

Muslim women today are faced with more and more challenges and discriminations. As a woman,

as a migrant, as a Muslim. Between assimi-lation and self-assertion, they continue to search for their place in modern European society.

However, some Muslim women have al-ready embodied a strong role in our mo-dernised European society. They do not only hold professions such as doctors, la-wyers and bankers, they also uphold a very important part in our society. Be it Sahira Awad, a famous Berlin rapper, Asmaa Ab-dol-Hamid, a Danish politician or Dr. Hou-aida Taraji, gynaecologist and president of the Muslim community in Germany, all of those strong and influential women have scavenged vast and glamorous roles. It is success stories such as those that are pro-gressed by the media and presented to the public as a sign of felicitous emancipation and integration of Muslim women. In Eu-ropean society, the image of the weak and obedient Muslim woman has been tossed aside more and more and out of this, strong role models have emerged. Though not all of those females are what we call “revea-ling”. Those women who choose to honour their religious code of conduct by wearing a hijab, niqab, chador or a burqa find them-selves continually discriminated by various authorities. Is modern European emancipa-tion always going to mean that women such as the above-mentioned will have to give up an important aspect and tradition of their re-ligion in order to be socially accepted into

Western civilization and can the new fresh face of modern Islam only be expressed through an uncovered, educated and rheto-rically strong and beautiful woman?

A strange spectacle was presented to the public in July 2010 where two young women started walking the streets of Paris wearing a burqa, however, dressed in a mini skirt and high heels. Their faces were co-vered, though their legs remained revealed. This humorous protest, later to be known as the “Niqabitch-Walk”, against the new-ly implemented ban of wearing a burka in France, was acknowledged as a sign for the growing dilemma which many Muslim women are faced with today. In an ongoing process, Muslim women are asked to pick a side. They either must go for the old and patriarchal Islam or choose the modernised, democratic and liberal western value sys-tem. Burqa or mini skirt, piety or emancipa-tion, Muslim or feminist. A balance seems impossible to find. Indeed, it was the high-est authority that recognized France’s new-ly implemented ban of Burkas as ”a legi-timate tool for a state to fight for a better coexistance in society”. The ban was not considered to be a discrimination and also, supposingly, was not restricting anybody in their private life. This was justifyed by none other than the European Court of Hu-man Rights in Strasbourg which caused a massive uproar, not only amongst Muslims. This fanciful declaration, however, cannot be taken seriously. Does Europe react this way because it is afraid of different views or is it something else? The prohibition of

Burqa or mini sKirt?-the moDern muslim Woman in europe

By Manon Lynn Schürch (CH)

23

wearing headscarfs in German schools is only one amongst many restrictions that has been implemented in the past few years.

Muslim women are challenged with being accepted into Western European society. On the one hand, they are being discriminated through a stereotypical western view of Is-lam, on the other hand, they feel cramped by the patriarchal moral concepts of their stamped surroundings. Everyone forms their opinion by whether a woman is wea-ring a headscarf or not, leading to always designating the Muslim woman’s place in society without even considering that Mus-lim women are indeed capable of embody-ing the role of an emancipated and strong fe-male, as well as at the same time acting out their freedom of religion. We have to stop

finding a controversy between tradition and Western society, between Islam and femi-nism. It is extremely important for Muslim women that they realise that in the present Western society, appointed laws will not be annulled by means of political action alone, but with the tool of religious argumentation. The key to acceptance and integration lies in the happy medium. The choice between modernity and tradition should no longer prevail and what European society must do is to start embracing old tradition in new and personal ways.

The answer will not be found in Vogue, nor in the Scharia. The answer is the “burkas-kirt”. ■

24

A patent is a form of intellectual rights protection that enables inventors and innovators to prevent compe-

titors from stealing their ideas in a global world, where innovations are valuable for the economic competitiveness. Patents are also of great importance because they en-courage companies to make the necessary investment for innovation, and provide the incentive for individuals and companies to devote resources to research and develop-ment.

The new “unitary patent package” seems to make everything as easy and perfect as possible for inventors and patent proprie-tors across the EU. This package will not only provide huge cost advantages and re-duce administrative and bureaucratic bur-dens, but it will also mean that inventors will spend more time on research and de-velopment. Additionally, this package will guarantee that the businesses sector, which need to defend their ideas, will go to only one court – the Unified Patent Court, which will be represented in the EU Member States as the only competent patent court both on a local and regional level. But will this new system, expected to be up by early 2015, be as flawless as it sounds?

Considering the earlier attempts of the Eu-ropean Union to agree on a community pa-tent, the unitary Convention failed twice because although signed, it was then not ra-tified by enough Member States of the Eu-ropean Economic Community at that time. Later in 2004, the Community Patent Re-gulation again failed due to disagreements on the details of the Regulation. That was when EU commissioner Bolkestein said: “I

can only hope that one day the vested, pro-tectionist interests that stand in the way of agreement on this vital measure will be si-delined by the over-riding importance and interests of European manufacturing indus-try and Europe‘s competitiveness.”

25 Member States finally agreed to partici-pate in the enhanced cooperation on the uni-tary patent protection. And now that all of them except Poland signed the Agreement on a Unified Patent Court, the only step missing is the ratification. The Agreement needs to be ratified by 13 of the 26 signato-ry states, these must include the UK, France and Germany as major patenting countries, for the new system to come into effect in those states which have ratified.

Unfortunately, one obstacle in the way of the EU patent package could be the UK. It was expected to ratify the UPC agreement in spring or summer 2014, which, conside-ring that summer 2014 is almost over, has still not happened. On the other side, the fact that British Prime Minister David Ca-meron promised an „in/out“ referendum on British membership of the EU causes great suspicion, too.

Furthermore, the costs of a unitary patent will loom large in the decisions of paten-tees. For now, the cost to obtain a Europe-an Patent with unitary effect seems to be approximately 5.000 Euros, which is still higher in comparison to the United States (US), where a patent costs arond 2.000 Eu-ros and China, where it is about 600 Eu-ros. Keeping in mind that in 2011, 224.000 patents were granted in the US, 172.000 in China, but only 62.000 in Europe, it is

the eu patent paCKage: DeFeCtiVe or FlaWless? (Juri)By Irmak Ekin Karel (TR)

25

uncertain if the unitary patent is good and cheap enough to be the inventor’s choice.On the other hand, although the unitary pa-tent aims to provide protection throughout the whole 28 Member States, the number of countries that the patent proprietors want to obtain patents in, differ. According to pa-tent statistics from 2013, half of patentees pay protection for only 3 Member States, whereas 2/5 patentees pay protection for only 5 Member States. The amount of pa-tentees interested in 28 Member States‘ protection is only 2/100. Hence, it again becomes very clear that the costs of the unitary patent, including the amount of the renewal fee, will play a major role in the decision to opt for the unitary patent or for a national patent issued from a European pa-tent application.

Given the last point, it is worth mentio-ning that the inflexibility of the new system might affect some companies’ or inventors’

decisions negatively. In the current Europe-an patent system, companies that have cho-sen to designate multiple countries often allow registrations in particular countries to lapse before the patent term has ended. As a money saver, this flexibility is significant, and will not be possible in the new system. So, if renewal costs are high for the patent proprietor, he or she will not be able to red-uce them, which is an evident disadvantage.On the whole, the Committee on Legal Af-fairs will have to decide on how to boost the advantages of the new unitary patent package, whilst dealing with the obstacles and disadvantages that could prevent busi-nesses and inventors from obtaining the Eu-ropean Patent with unitary effects.■

26