Introduction
Après le Reveil des Citoyens du 29 mai 2005 & 13 juin 2008 ¦ Confoederatio Europae
(for a special index on ex-Yugoslavia, click here, for Iraq, here and here, for Iran, here)

11 May 09    Like a fish, Europe is rotting from the head, FT, Wolfgang Münchau

Ireland Shoots Down Plan for a More Unified E.U. , WP, Kevin Sullivan, 14.6.08
   Comment: Give Europe back to its Citizens!, 14.6.08
Towards a Europe with a future - talking points of a Turkish citizen for other Eurosceptics,Adam, Gogel, 29.4.08
German-Polish relations sink to new low, Mark Landler, IHT, 21.12.2006
Quo Vadis Europa Helvetica? De-Rusting and Revving-Up the Wheel - or Re-Inventing It?, 14.6.2005
Quelques traités d'actualité conclus par la France, 11.5.2005 (version originale: 9.3.1990)
EU-Haftbefehl - Beispiel eines EU-Ukase
    der Verfassungsbestimmungen von EU-Mitgliedstaaten verletzt, 23.3.2005
Valid, yet moribund U.S. Treaties with EU States, 21.2.2005
Zum Bilateralen Vertragsnetz der Schweiz und der EU-Staaten, Annotierte Bibliographie, 4.Feb 2005
Les contrôles à la douane sont illégaux!, Un jugement français rétablit les spécifités de la zone franche,
Michel Eggs, 3 fév 2005, Tribune de Genève
Der EU-Haftbefehl, Ulrich Schlüer, 14.Jan 2005, Schweizerzeit
Si vis pacem para bellum!, 29 Dez 2004, Iconoclast
EUROPA  HELVETICA, Discours d'adieu de Franz A. Blankart, IUHEI, Genève, 22 oct 2002
Satellisierung der Schweiz?, Pierre Mirabaub, Finanz & Wirtschaft, 4. Mai 2002
Letter to Bundesrat Adolf OGI, from J.A.Keller, 3 Feb 1995, on Alpine transit options,
    EUROMETRO integration of European airports, and Swiss water guardian rôle
EEA rejection: The Swiss Won't Really `Go it Alone', WSJ, Anton Keller, 8 Dec 92
Petition towards a European Commenwealth, GOGEL draft, 13 Aug 1991
On the Ideal Nation (extracts;  complete text at: www.solami.com/nations.htm),
    a CORUM contribution to the European Confederation Conference, Prague, 12-14 June 1991
Assises de la Confédération européenne,Prague, 12 - 14 juin 1991
     réunion tenue à l'invitation des Présidents Václav Havel et François Mitterrand
Perspectives pour l'Agriculture dans le Bassin Lémanique, CORUM esquisse, 2 sep 1990
The Past of Europe's Future, SELEX editorial, 1 Aug 1990
Aufbruch zur Selbstverwirklichung, Brief an Präsident Václav Havel, 14.Feb 1990
After History Swept Away the Berlin Wall, What Next if Not a European Confederation?
     J.A.Keller, adopted to Links to Europe's Future, The Wall Street Journal, 16 Jan 1990
LES ZONES FRANCHES EN EUROPE - Extraits d’un inventaire au sujet de la région de Genève
   rédigé par l’équippe de recherche CORUM sous la direction de J.A.Keller, 23 oct 1989
Les zones franches de la région franco-genevoise à l'heure de l'intégration européenne,
  Françoise Buffat, Mémoire de diplôme, Genève, avril 1979
 

INDEX  ON  EX-YUGOSLAVIA, ALBANIA, ETC.

EDITOR'S NOTE

18 July 1996  - Memo 9:  Keeping the Balkan Peace Process on the Rails
30 Aug 1995  - Minorities Then, Now and Hence
17 July 1995  - Will Great Power Complicity Undo the UN as with the League of Nations?
22 March 1995  - Beyond Responsibility, Co-Responsibility & Guilt on former Yugoslavia
6 March 1995  - Towards a Europe-Linked Referendum in ex-Yugoslavia
26 Aug 1994  - ACTION PLAN FOR EX-YUGOSLAVIA
14  July 1994  -  Mediation Plan
5 April 1994  - From Broken Promises to Real Minority Protection in former Yugoslavia
7 Feb 1994  - AGENDA FOR ALBANESE ACTIONS
27 Jan 1994  - GOGEL to: HRH The Sultan of Brunei
Draft UN General Assembly Resolutions (ex-Yugoslavia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Wayout)
5 Jan 1994  - GOGEL to: The Hon. Datuk Dominic PUTHUCHEARY, ISIS Malaysia
7 Sep 1993  - Legal Facts and Considerations
7 Sep 1993  - International Minority Protection Guarantees in ex-Yugoslavia
29 July 1993  - DECLARATION AGAINST  GENOCIDE
2 July 1993  - Memo 7:  UN Trusteeship Plan for Bosnia-Herzegovina
3 Sep 1992  - PROTECTION OF MINORITIES
30 Oct 1991  - Memo 5:  DUBROVNIK, the 1st European Commenwealth Town
3 July 1991  - Memo 2:  The Humanitarian Law Basis for Neutralized Zones
30 June 1991  - An Appeal for Help
12-14 June 1991  - CONFOEDERATIO EUROPAE, Assises

     With the 1989 fall of the Berlin Wall, the world had entered a new age for which no statesman or institution anywhere was adequately prepared.  Like before him Alexis de Tocqueville,Karl Marx, Friedrich List, Edgar Salin, Friedrich Hayek and others, Henry Kissinger was called upon to look back for providing some guidance.  He did so brilliantly in his contribution "De Gaulle: What He Would Do Now" to the International Herald Tribune (7 May 1990).  For he brought out some often overlooked fundamentals inAmerican-French, American-European and French-German relations which continue to dominate and, at least on the French side, have been recognized as such.

     Others apparently didn't find it opportune to call on their "Kissingers" (i.e. today's Blochers⁽¹⁾, Dahrendorfs, von der Flühs, von Habsburgs, Madelins, Pestalozzis, de Villiers, Wittmanns, etc.) - and it shows.  For it was - in political terms - as if the magnetic field had once again disappeared, with those equipped with and relying only on a magnetic compass left woefully disoriented.  That is: until they will have adapted to fundamentally changed conditions and found an adequate new guidance system.  Such a system had to be independent of outside influences.  Borrowing further from the field of natural science, it could be described as the human equivalent of an inertial compass⁽²⁾.

     All this was not only understood by two visionary Statesmen, but gave rise for them also to act on the future of Europe. Presidents Havel and Mitterrand called on outstanding Europeans to discuss their ideas on where and how to go from hereat the European Confederation Conference in Prague in June 1991.  I.e. at the very moment, Yugoslavia started to unravel at the seams, exposed the deficiencies of Europe's present architecture and gave a glimpse of what may lay ahead on its well-intended, yet ill-designed and worn-out tracks.  Unimpressed by what was cooking in "Brussels", the conference participants set their sight on the new horizons which were thus opened up to Europe's East.  They analyzed the prevailing conditions specifically in the fields of energy, environment, transports and communications, circulation of persons, and culture.  And they came up with an astonishingly clear, coherent and widely supported reading of what may be called their collective inertial compass. The developments which have since taken place on the initial "European" paths confirm both timeliness and substance of that memorable gathering.  As a building block for follow-up meetings and measures, the final report of this Prague Conference is being presented here - initially in French only - together with related material and further food for thought.

     Some 67 years ago, Geneva was the venue for a quite similar, yet still-born undertaking launched by the then-foreign ministers of France and Germany, Aristide Briand and Gustave Stresemann.  Their plan essentially provided for:
-     Full maintenance of "the sovereignty of States and their equality in law", a "Federal Union which shall be fully compatible with the respect for the traditions and individual traits of each people".
-     "Establishment of a common market for maximum elevation of the level of human well-being on the entire territory of the European community ... by way of progressive liberalization and systematic simplification of the exchange of goods, capital and persons".
-     "Regeneration of agricultural regions ... Cooperation of universities and academies ...development of contacts and exchange of views between lawmaker circles of different European countries."

      Meanwhile, Geneva evolved further on the track of its international vocation.  Yet, by now, pressing economic and political problems have some worried where the current of history will take it.  In contrast, others are elated by the opportunities they see to avail themselves to visionary and enterprising decision-makers capable of moving ahead outside of worn-out tracks.  True, things evolve no longer comfortably along the lines of the out-dated and may-be-irreparably-deficient blueprints of Europe's only remaining Kremlin-style bureaucracy. Thus, it might indeed be helpful if some premises and taboos from the cold war era were thoroughly reconsidered.  And if "Brussels" - Europe's "provisional" capital and what it stands for - were to be revamped accordingly, thus putting on notice its proliferating subsidy artists, servants and sherpas in various satellites across the Old Continent and beyond.

     To wit, historically, Geneva's Hinterland consisted of the Pays de Gex to the West and North (396 km²) and the Haute Savoie's free zone to its East and South (3112 km²).  Since the Republic and Canton of Geneva (282 km²) in 1815 joined Switzerland (41290 km²), this odd couple has lived mostly in two bedrooms.  Not surprisingly, some Germanic compatriots rarely missed an opportunity to undercut Geneva and play up their economic prowess - as long as it lasted, that is.  So, with the evolutions taking place inside and outside of Heidyland, Geneva's future may again lay in and grow from its past.  Geneva may again become what it used to be, i.e. the culturally, economically and politically vibrant and radiating center of its historic Hinterland, theregio genevensis.  As such - some observers believe - it might even evolve into a genuine lighthouse shining far beyond its narrow borders, a universally esteemed point of convergence or more on the way to the Confoederatio Europae.
______________
(1)    Together with AUNS, an influential conservative grassroots organization pursuing principles and visions seen to have been dear to Charles De Gaulle, Franz-Joseph Strauss, Margaret Thatcher and Jesse Helms, the maverick, popular and ever less circumventable tribune, industrialist and Member of Parliament Christoph Blocher presented in December 1997 a partisan, yet fairly accurate analysis - "La Suisse et l'Europe - 5 ans après le rejet de l'EEE", made on the fifth anniversary of the Swiss voters' overwhelming refusal, in December 1992, to join the European Economic Space - arguing against Switzerland's further integration into the present European structures while ignoring some often self-inflicted economic, cultural and political drawbacks of Switzerland's "Sonderfall" policies.
(2)    Interestingly though - and whether we still know it or not - basically, we are all equipped with such an instrument in the form of intuition and knowledge about guiding principles.

Links to Europe's Future

     The call for boldness in shaping Europe's future in wake of the dramatic events in Eastern Europe ("Brussels and Broadening," editorial, Dec. 19) gives rise to a need to redirect the present concept of the European economic entity toward a new EC - the European Confederation. Its key tasks should be to assure the continent-wide transition from state tutelage to individual liberties and responsibilities, thus safeguarding and promoting not the bureaucratic but the historic, cultural and social achievements of Western and Eastern, Northern and Southern Europe.
     Shaping Europe's future calls for reanimating and complementing forgotten bilateral treaties and regional free zones. A reinvigorated and enlarged Council of Europe may provide the most fertile ground for this. Unlocking Europe's dormant potential requires political decentralization and even devolution-not supra-nationalism, centralization and plain-levelling. With that, open markets, borders, universities, minds and, of course, real value currencies, could indeed again work wonders. To that end Europeans could establish the European Confederation's Round Table in Basel, and set as its first goal the drafting of a peace treaty with a united Berlin-letting the two Germanys dissolve and join a confederated Berlin.
     From there, Europeans could explore the continent's dense network of treaties, many of which are still in force, albeit forgotten, generations after their ratifications (e.g. those with the Baltic states). In many cases these treaties are founded on libertarian principles, providing for commerce, customs, tax, establishment and other regional freedoms. People in many parts of Europe could fight for these freedoms - if only they knew that these treaties still exist and are formally protected, most importantly by Article 234 of the Treaty of Rome.
     We must guard against the Orwellian monsters East Europeans are in the process of burying from resurfacing as clean-shaven bureaucrats purportedly safeguarding social justice and fighting newly-created "crimes," like cash transactions, keeping personal data secret, hiding property from confiscation, etc. Already, tax curtains are being drawn up everywhere, with fiscal administrations ganging up for electronic hot pursuit of citizens making use of legal tax advantages offered elsewhere. We are fooling ourselves when we applaud the fall of the Iron Curtain if we tolerate the erection of no less effective new instruments undermining the freedom of movement.
 ANTON KELLER, Geneva

Reintroducing measures to genuinely safeguarding private property will be a good start. Eventually, the right to undisclosed private property will provide the lithmus test, the real measure of a society's respect for human rights. On the way there, self-defeating confiscatory taxations will naturally have to go. However, psychologically and politically even more urgent, the initiative-killing fiscal tutelage of the citizen [symbolized by his/her obligation to furnish income records, thus devaluing to a mere penal trap his/her signature on the dotted line of the tax declaration] must be abolished by shifting again back to the State the burden of proof when his labors' hard-gained fruits are being taxed. Everthing short of that is indicative of an Orwellian upside-down citizen-State relationship, with emasculated citizens at the service of an ever more assuming, arrogant and self-serving bureaucracy.

     In the past few months, we have breathlessly witnessed both unbloody and bloody self-liberations of entire peoples who, for decades, were abused and kept hostage by officials-turned-State criminals who had hijacked and perverted human rights and social ideals. And make no mistake: the ensuing turmoil is neither over nor limited to Eastern Europe! In this situation, where the currents of history majestically sweep away man's most powerfully designed suppression instruments, we would hardly rise to the challenges and occasions thus presented, if we were to drive the Austrians, the Hungarians, the Lithuanians, the Russians, the Turks, etc. to heed mediocrity and to pay tribute to new white-collar dictators. In fact, the East Europeans' biggest contribution to the renovation of the Common European House may well emanate from their whole-generation live experiment with emasculated plain-levelled citizens, i.e. from their dearly acquired conviction that bureaucrats don't produce, but hinder the citizen in his pursuit of happiness by doing his thing!

     Therefore, coming to think of it, Europe - i.e. the EC/EFTA+, the European Economic Space, the European Confederation or whatever name it may be given - is not endangered from those wanting to participate more actively in its construction, but from already contracted diseases, such as Eurosclerosis with its tell-tale over-regulations and its concurrent erosions of individual risk-taking, liberties and responsibilities.

     Europe must be built on and around its truly liberated, re-responsibilized citizens which, as such, are the best guarantee for individual cultural traits and national identities to fructify rather than endanger its peaceful evolution. And if it is true that fun-poking people capable of profound self-mockery are least dangerous, evoke most confidence among their neighbours and provide the atmosphere for genuine progress, why not have the European Confederation's Round Table meet regularly in Europe's most vital carneval towns?

To wit: Europe not only deserves, but desperately needs the vaccinations it can get from its Eastern citizens against Orwellian monsters. For Europe must guard against its future being hijacked back into its bleak past of inquisition and witch hunts - this time by clean-shaven bureaucrats purportedly safeguarding social justice and fighting newly created - of course, bureaucracy-strengthening - "crimes", like cash transactions, keeping personal data secret, hiding property from confiscation, etc. Already, tax curtains are being drawn up everywhere, with fiscal administrations ganging up for electronic hot pursuit of citizens making use of legal tax advantages offered elsewhere. Who are we fooling by applauding the fall of the Iron Curtain while tolerating the erection of no less effective new instruments undermining the freedom of movement?

Genève, 14.Februar 1990

Vaclav HAVEL, Präsident Republik Tschechoslovakei
P r a g     CR

Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident,

     Als ich kürzlich in der WELTWOCHE vom 5.Februar Ihre Neujahrsrede an Ihre Mitbürger las, trieb es mich zu diesen Zeilen. Ich war darob auch, ich muss es gestehen, ausserst gerührt, obwohl wir in unserer "aufgeklärten Welt" gegen solche Gemütsregungen erzogen worden sind.
     Aber vielleicht haben wir alle uns allzulange der Vernunft gebeugt und den uns allen innewohnenden Kräften zu entziehen versucht. Tatsächlich haben die meisten von uns verlernt, unsere Intuition, unseren ureigensten inneren Kompass zu beachten - vielleicht weil er oft in andere, scheinbar vernunftwidrige Richtungen weist. So dass wir nun, als Angehörige einer älteren Generation dort, wo unsere Nachkommen sich als ungebeugte politische Naturtalente entpuppen, Antworten auf Ihre Frage bedenken können: "Woher schöpfen eigentlich die jungen Leute, die nie ein anderes System gekannt haben, ihre Sehnsucht nach Wahrheit, ihren Sinn für Freiheit, ihre politische Phantasie, ihre Zivilcourage und ihre bürgerliche Besonnenheit?"
     Ihre Ausführungen über die Möglichkeiten und Plichten des Einzelnen - insbesondere "die Pflicht, selbständig, frei, vernünftig und rasch zu handeln" - setzen die Anspruchslatte erfrischend und herausfordernd hoch an. Sie reflektieren damit ein Menschenbild, das m.E. dem Ideal des homo oeconomicus sehr nahe kommt, nämlich dem Bild eines souveränen, unternehmerischen Bürgers, der zur Übernahme von Verantwortung und Risiko befähigt und bereit ist, und der dadurch den höchstmöglichen Beitrag an seine auf sein Wohl ausgerichteten Gemeinschaft beisteuern kann und erbringt. Ich frage mich aber, wie weit wir - sowohl im bisher "sozialistischen" Osten, wie bei uns im "kapitalisischen" Westen - von diesem Idealzustand entfernt sind.

QUO VADIS?
     Ein Sprichwort zum Schweizer National-"Sport", dem "Jass", besagt, dass derjenige nur reelle Erfolgschancen hat, der es versteht mit jenen Jasskarten zu spielen, die er tatsächlich in den Händen hält. Und unser National-Einsiedler Niklaus von Flüh ermahnte schon die alten Eidgenossen die "Zäune nicht allzuweit" zu stecken, als ihre Siege zum Aufbrach nach neuen Horizonten verlockten, sie gleichzeitig aber an innerer Zwietracht auseinanderzubrechen drohten.
     All dies und mehr geht mir durch den Kopf, wenn ich die Ratschläge und Rezepte bedenke, die mancher meiner in- und ausländischen Kollegen unseren europäischen Freunden im "befreiten" Osten anbietet. Worunter das Massnahmenpaket von Harvard-Professor Jeffrey Sachs, das in verschiedenen Punkten m.E. zumindest ebenso dringend unseren westlichen Politikern beliebt gemacht zu werden verdient. Z.B. die z.T. auch von ihm im Economist (13.-19.Januar 1990, siehe Beilage) aufgestellte Forderung nach Entlastung der unternehmerischen Bürger von konfiskatorischen Steuern und administrativen Behinderungen.
     Meine eigenen Beobachtungen als langjähriger Parlamentarierberater zeigen, dass wir z.B. in der Schweiz von idealen Zuständen noch weit entfernt sind. Ja dass mit zunehmender Gesetzesdichte und einhergehender, immer mehr sich selbst zudienender Bürokratie wir uns vom Ideal zusehends entfernen. Und dass viele der sich als Bannerträger der freien Gesellschaft und Marktvirtschaft verstehenden - und auch verstandenen - Mitbürger allzoft den Weg des geringsten Widerstandes beschreiten. Ohne zu erkennen, dass sie sich damit zu unserer aller Nachteil tatsächlich als deren Totengräber betätigen. Ich denke dabei vor allem an einige unserer Bankier, die durch eigenes Tun und Lassen der Bürokratie und sogar fremdem Recht und fremden Pressionen Vorschub geleistet haben, besonders in den Fällen der Doppelbesteuerungs-Konventionen sowie der lex americana Insider- und Bargeld-Kriminalisierungen. Dies aus kurzsichtigen Opportunitäts-Erwägungen heraus (um als "Musterknabe" vermeintlich den Respekt und das Wohlwollen der amerikanischen Bürokraten zu erkaufen und so die eigene Präsenz im lukrativen U.S.-Markt zu "sichern").  Unter Missachtung fundamentaler Fiskal-, Strafrechts- und Souveränitäts-Prinzipien.
     Und, wie figura zeigt (zB. die Bewirkung des Rücktritts unserer verdienten ersten Landesmutter durch amerikanische Manipulationen und Missbrauch schweizerischer Guter Dienste), mit verheerenden Folgen.
    Wenn ich Ihnen trotz Ihrer völlig anders gelegenen Interessen- und Ausgangslage über solch spezifisch schweizerische Erfahrungswerte berichte, so aus Sorge über möglicherweise übersehbare Gelegenheiten zur Vermeidung analoger, u.U. konzeptioneller Fehlentwicklungen.

VERMEIDBARE FEHLENTWICKLUNGEN:
1. VERNACHLÄSSIGTE STAATSVERTRÄGE
     Dazu gehört die Gefahr der unzureichend bedachten, ja überstürzten Aushandlung neuer Handels- und Zusammenarbeits-Abkommen u.a. mit der Europäischen Gemeinschaft - noch bevor ein Überblick über die mit den einzelnen westeuropäischen Handelspartnern bereits abgeschlossenen Verträge vorliegt. Denn letztere, soweit sie vor dem EG-Grundvertrag von Rom von 1957 in Kraft traten, sind gemäss dessen Art.234 vorrangig [durch die missglückte europäische Verfassung und den nun ebenfalls gescheiterten Vertrag von Lissabon wäre diese Grundstruktur zugunsten der Brüsseler Ukase umgestossen worden, was auch für die längerfristigen Vertragsbeziehungen der Schweiz zu den 27 EU-Staaten bedauerliche Folgen gehabt hätte]. In Verbindung mit der regelmässigen Meistbegünstigungsklausel und in den Händen kompetenter Diplomaten stellen diese meist allseits vergessenen, jedoch immer noch in Kraft stehenden und damit - nur vom politischen Willen abhängig - jederzeit wiederbelebbaren Vertragswerke ausserordentlich potente Trumpfkarten dar, welche durch neue Abkommen versehentlich verspielt werden könnten (siehe Beilage mit meinem am 16.Januar 1990 im Wall Street Journal abgedruckten Artikel "Links to Europe's Future", das ausführlichere Manuskript dazu, sowie den Text von Art.234 des Römer Vertrags).
     Als mein bescheidener Beitrag zum Neubeginn Ihrer Nationen habe ich die von einem ausserordentlich freiheitlichen, markt-orientierten Geist geprägten Abkommen zusammengestellt, welche gemäss Verzeichnis des Völkerbundes von der Tschechoslovakei in der Zwischenkriegszeit abgeschlossen worden sind. Ich darf diese reiche Sammlung völkerrechtlicher Erbstücke Ihrer Aufmerksamkeit - und derjenigen Ihrer besonderen Vertrauten - anempfehlen. Gegebenenfalls wäre ich gerne bereit zusätzlich abzuklären, ob irgendeiner dieser Verträge formell ausser Kraft gesetzt worden ist. Vom französischen Aussenministerium erhielt ich bereits Bestätigung darüiber, dass Frankreich den 1928er Handelsvertrag immer noch als rechtskräftig betrachtet.

2.  "MARKT-INHÄRENTE" ARBEITSLOSIKEIT
     Für das innerstaatliche, das Sozial-Gefüge besonders schwerwiegende Fehlentwicklungen sind nicht auszuschliessen bei Hinnahme massiver (d.h. über wenige Prozente der aktiven Bevölkerung hinausgehender) Arbeitslosigkeit, welche in weiten Kreisen als system-inhärent, als mit dem Marktsystem scheinbar unausweichlich verbunden betrachtet wird. Ich kann mich bei meinen nachfolgend in Kurzform zusammengefassten Gedanken allerdings nur auf meine hier über die Jahre gesammelten Eindrücke und vorläufigen Schlussfolgerungen stützen. Die konkreten "Arbeitslosen"-Verhältnisse in der Schweiz (derzeit rund 1%) sind darüber hinaus nicht repräsantativ fur die in jedem andern westeuropäischen Staat eher umgekehrt angespannte Arbeitsmarktlage (immerhin belegen diese von der "Norm" abweichenden Schweizer Verhältnisse die These, dass Marktwirtschaft nicht unausweichlich einen grossen Arbeitslosensockel bewirkt). Meine diesbezüglichen Erwägungen haben allerdings keinen spezifischen Bezug auf Schweizer Verhältnisse; aus Platzgründen beschränke ich mich hier wesentlich auf grundsätzliche Aspekte des Arbeitsmarktes. Als solche mögen sie vielleicht dennoch nutzbringend zur weiteren Illustration des Gesagten beigezogen werden.
     Ich erachte die heutige - meist arbeitslosen- und konkursintensive - Praxis des Arbeitsmarkts als sozial und volkswirtschaftich bedenklich ungünstigen, vermeidbaren Auswuchs der Arbeitsteilung und der damit einhergehenden Ökonomischen Entmündigung des Bürgers. Arbeitslosigkeit, als Wort, steht besonders dafür stellvertretend.
 Der Landwirt - Inbegriff eigenständigen und gesamtheitlichen Denkens und Werkens - versteht sich als Treuhänder der ihm erb- oder pachtrechtlich anvertrauten Scholle. Als solcher kennt er keine Arbeitslosigkeit im landläufigen Sinne. Er, seine Familie und seine Mitarbeiter befolgen die von der Natur wesentlich vorgebenen Arbeitsrythmen. Je nach Jahreszeit, Umwelt- und Markt-Verhältnissen werden die verfügbaren Arbeitskräfte voll ausgelastet oder ist eine beschaulichere Gangart tunlich oder gar geboten. Ähnliches kann selbst von der in städtischen Verhältnissen lebenden und für das Wohl ihrer Familienmitglieder besorgten Hausfrau gesagt werden.
    Demgegenüber ist besonders der in der hochgradig arbeitsteiligen Industrie oder Dienstleistungsbranche beschäftigte Arbeitnehmer vorrangig den Marktkräften, und damit direkt den u.U. starken Arbeitsmarktfluktuationen ausgesetzt. Je nach Ausgestaltung des Sozialnetzes treffen diese den unselbständig Erwerbstätigen weniger in dessen Einkommen - und damit in seiner anhaltenden Kaufkraft -als in seiner ökonomischen und sozialen Rolle, in seinem Selbstverständnis und in seinem Selbstwertgefühl.
     Damit nähern wir uns einem - auch und besonders fur die im Umbruch stehenden ost-europäischen Staaten bedeutsam scheinenden - Problem der modernen Industriegesellschaft. Ich bezeichne es als das Phänomen der sterilen und doch eiternden Kreisläufe. Kreisläufe, weil die mit entlohnter Arbeit "beglückten" Erwerbstätigen zugunsten der keine Lohnarbeit Findenden ein infinites, mehr oder weniger selbsttragendes Sozialversicherungs-System unterhalten, welches geeignet ist, die Kaufkraft der Versicherten wesentlich zu erhalten und so das Schwungrad des Marktes möglichst weiter anzutreiben. Volkswirtschaftlich steril, weil die Versicherungszahlungen ohne entsprechende Arbeits-Gegenleistungen erfolgen. Und doch eiternd, weil die betroffenen Menschen unter diesem System vielfaltig leiden, Familien-, Alkohol- und Drogenprobleme damit vorprogrammiert werden, und weil damit die dringend benötigte Kreativität und Produktivität vieler Bürger der Volkswirtschaft systematisch entzogen werden. Das jetzige System zur gesellschaftlichen Verkraftung der Arbeitslosen ist daher zudem alles andere als ein ökonomisches Erfolgsrezept; als Quelle der Verschleuderung bedeutender verfügbarer nationaler Ressourcen ruft es nach grundsätzlichen, konzeptionellen Änderungen.
     Im Osten wahrscheinlich nicht weniger als bei uns im Westen deckt der Begriff Arbeitslosigkeit ein Arbeitsverhältnis ab (und auf), das bei genauerer Betrachtung eine für den freien Menschen fundamental gegensätzliche, im Grunde genommen abnormale Arbeitsform offenbart - die der systematischen Überantwortung selbständigen Denkens, Entscheidens und Handelns an andere, an Risiko und Verantwortung übernehmende Befehlsgeber. Dies erscheint insofern abnormal, als der homo oeconomicus, d.h. eigentlich jeder normale erwachsene Mensch, charakteristischerweise die Antworten auf seine wirtschaftlichen und andern Probleme in erster Linie bei, in und um sich selbst sucht. Ansonsten gibt er den mit seinen Problemen konfrontierten andern quasi eine Einladung mehr Kompetenz wahrzunehmen, als ihnen zukommt, und dabei ihre Probleme ihrerseits auf seine Schultern abzuschieben.
     Industrielle "Vollbeschäftigung", solange der Markt sie bewirkt, stellt in diesem Licht eine gegenseitig befriedigende Abnormalitat dar, wohingegen Arbeitslosigkeit (als der riskante Teil dieser Abnormalität) als Ausdruck der Unfähigkeit und/oder Unwilligkeit des Einzelnen erscheint, die ihn überall umgebenden wirtschaftlichen Gelegenheiten zu erkennen, sich darauf einzustellen und zu nutzen.
     Eine hohe Arbeitslosenrate stellt demnach ein untrügliches Zeichen dar für den Rückbildungsgrad einer Gesellschaft, ja für deren auf dem Kopf stehenden orwell'sches Bürger-Staat-Verhältnis mit den damit verbundenen mangelhaften Menschenrechts-Errungenschaften. Sie legt Zeugnis ab für des einzelnen Bürger's fallende Tendenz und Fähigkeit zu Selbst-Genügsamkeit, Eigenverantwortung und Risikoübernahme. Kurz, sie wiederspiegelt des homo oeconomicus' verminderte Bereitschaft und Fähigkeit das ihm Obliegende und Zustehende zu tun, nämlich routinemässig Unternehmertum zu praktizieren.
     Der Bürger hier und dort bedarf der reellen Befreiung von staatlicher Bevormundung nicht nur im politischen, sondern auch und besonders im wirtschaftlichen Bereich. Er wird nicht eher sein Kreativitäts- und Arbeitspotential zur Entfaltung bringen können und wollen, als er vom Staat wieder als der Souverän, der er ist, respektiert wird. Als er wieder Hoffnung auf eine baldige bessere Zukunft nicht nur sich einredet, sondern überzeugt und konkret untermauert am Familientisch vertreten kann. Als er wieder seine reelle Gelegenheit erhält, selbständiges, risiko-beladenes und auch ökolgisch verantwortliches Handeln zu praktizieren. Und als er wieder Gewissheit darüber haben wird, die Früchte seines unternehmerischen Tuns tatsächlich und unbeschnitten geniessen zu können - wo immer und wie er es für richtig findet. Das Recht auf undeklariertes privates Eigentum muss ihm verbrieft werden (dieses Recht scheint übrigens vom fundamentalen, in jedem zivilisierten Strafrecht verankerten Menschenrecht gegen Selbstbezichtigung ebenso untrennbar zu sein, als es für die Würde und Wohlfahrt eines jeden Bürger's und einer jeden freien Gesellschaft unverzichtbar ist).
     Konkret - im Sinne organischer Entwicklung - könnte das besonders im Falle der von Ihnen präsidierten Nationen heissen,
a) dass der Untergrundmarkt an die Oberfläche gezogen, d.h. legalisiert werden mag;
b) dass die Nabelschnur des unselbständigen Erwerbstätigen zum Staat (d.h. der Lohnausweis, resp. die von den Betrieben dem Steueramt erstattete Meldung über das Einkommen des einzelnen Mitarbeiters) durchschnitten, und die Beweislast dem Staat zurückgegeben werden mag für alle Einkünfte, die vom Bürger nicht selbst deklariert worden sind;
c) dass jedem Bürger - ob Beamter, Angestellter oder Arbeiter - das Recht auf selbständige Erwerbsarbeit soweit zustehen soll, als er bereit ist auf einen entsprechenden Prozentsatz seines ordentlichen Lohns aus unselbständigem Erwerb zu verzichten;
d) dass für sämtliche selbständigen Arbeiten die Honorierung in harter, frei exportierbarer Währung (evt. sogar in einer neu zu schaffenden Goldwährung) erfolgen kann und soll; und
e) dass das französische Beispiel des elektronischen Telephonbuchs MINITEL eingehendst studiert und evt. prioritär im ganzen Land verwirklicht werden mag (mit bereits 5 Millionen in privaten Haushalten installierten Geräten ist die gesamte französische Gesellschaft daran, mit fliegendem, spielerischem Start den Eintritt ins Informatikzeitalter zu vollziehen; bereits entstand eine völlig neue, ressourcen-sparende Service-Industrie; deren Hauptmerkmal ist ein von selbständigen Bürgern getragener, ausserordentlich ressourcen-mobilisierender steuerfreier "elektronischer Flohmarkt" [vgl. die erfolgreichen Teilanwendungen dieses Grundgedankens auf dem Internet: ebay.com]).
     Und da all dies nicht über Nacht geschehen kann, dürfte es auch sinnvoll sein, gewisse Vorsichtschritte bei grundlegenden Neuerungen zu beachten. Z.B. dass es wohl niemandem in den Sinn käme ein neues Flugzeug oder eine neue Maschine in Massen zu produzieren, bevor deren "Kinderkrankheiten" nicht mittels Prototypen eruiert und behoben werden konnten. Diese Phase und Funktion sind unverzichtbar. Die kompetente Auswertung ihrer Resultate allein ergibt ein tragfähiges Fundament fur die spätere Entwicklung. Sie ermöglicht den erfolgsträchtigen Aufbau sowie die Feinabstimmung der späteren [aufeinander angewiesenen und daher gleichermassen zu beachtenden stakeholder als] Produktionsfaktoren Management, Belegschaft, Ausrüstung, Finanzhaushalt, Marketing, etc. Im Sinne solcher Prototypen bietet sich die Schaffung und das organische Gedeihenlassen von wirtschaftlichen Freizonen an.  Oder noch besser, soweit vorhanden, die Wiederbelebung in Vergessenheit geratener, staatsvertraglich begründeter Freizonen. Sie kommen als Test- und Demonstrationsgebiet schliesslich der ganzen Volkswirtschaft zugute.

3.  DISKRIMINIERTE UND VERNACHLÄSSIGTE MITBÜRGER IM AUSLAND
     Meine nachfolgend zusammengefassten Erkenntnisse entstammen zwar auch meinen Arbeiten in der Schweiz; Parallelen zum Verhältnis Ihrer Mitbürger im Ausland zu deren Heimat sind aber gleichwohl denkbar:
a) Das Selbstverständnis unserer Diplomaten und Konsularbeamten ist oft auf die Pflege der zwischenstaatlichen Beziehungen beschränkt.
b) Der Beitrag der im Ausland ansässigen Mitbürger insbesondere an die beidseitigen Handelsbeziehungen wird in der Regel vorzüglich bei offiziellen Anlassen mit blossen Lippenbekenntnissen gewürdigt.
c) Die vielfaltigen Benachteiligungen, denen unsere Mitbürger im Ausland ausgesetzt sind, werden durch das Tun und Lassen der eigenen Gesetzgeber, sowie der hinter dem Schutzschirm diplomatischer Privilegien tätigen offiziellen Gesandten, oftmals und zumindest aus Unachtsamkeit noch verschärft. Missachtet wird dabei die Tatsache, dass auch in der Gegenwart und in Zukunft private Bürger, Handelsleute, Gelehrte, Saisonarbeiter, Studenten, etc. wesentliches zur Stärkung der Position des Staates im Ausland beitragen können. Und dass sie dies auch umso einfallsreicher, tatkräftiger und erfolgsträchtiger tun dürften, als ihre Bemühungen seitens der Heimatbehörden tatsächliche, tangible Wertschätzung bewirken [statt als konkurrenzierende Paralleldiplomatie missachtet oder gar bekämpft zu werden].
     Die Stärkung der Rechtsposition der im Ausland ansässigen Mitbürger ist in der Tat kein Gnadenakt, sondern eine Massnahme, welche aus Gründen der Solidaritat, der Vernunft und nicht zuletzt der langfristigen staatlichen Eigeninteressen geboten ist. Gelegenheiten dazu bieten sich z.B. im Zusammenhang mit dem Bürgerrecht (z.B. Reintegrierung ins Bürgerrecht ohne Rücksicht auf inzwischen erworbene Bürgerrechte von Drittstaaten, Ehrenbürgerrecht für verdiente Ausländer, etc.), dem internationalen Privatrecht (Zurverfügungstellung des heimatlichen Richters und Rechts in Personen-, Familien- und Erbrechtsfragen), und nicht zuletzt auch diesbezüglich, in Verbindung mit vergilbten, zumindest teilweise aber noch in Kraft stehenden Staatsverträgen.
     Solche und weitere Gedanken bedürfen der eingehenderen Reflexion. Es ist fraglich, ob unter dem derzeit in den Kanzleien in Ost und West vorherrschenden Explosionsdruck [und Sättigung an oft wenig bis überhaupt nicht relevanten Signalen] die dafür nötige Musse gefunden werden kann. Und doch erscheint mir die dazu aufgewendete Zeit gut, ja bestens investiert. Vielleicht vermag ein nicht nur geistiges, sondern ein regelmässiges physisches Zurücktreten aus dem Alltags-Rahmen und -Stress dieser Sachlage eher gerecht zu werden.
     Ich denke dabei an einen öfteren Rückzug von mit analogen Problemen belasteten politischen Pfadfindern des Ostens an einem geeigneten Besprechungsort, sozusagen an einen diskreten "Stammtisch" irgendwo. Ich könnte mir vorstellen, dass dabei solche regelmässige informelle Gespräche durch die Anwesenheit geeigneter Persönlichkeiten aus aller Welt zu einer hervorragenden Quelle gegenseitiger Bereicherung werden könnten.  Und ich wäre nicht erstaunt darüber, wenn der gemeinsame Nenner solcher Gespräche zunächst an einem Ort wie Genf, z.B. im Masaryk-Zentrum beim Völkerbunds-Palast [oder an meinem eigenen Rückzugsort in den Wallisser Alpen], gefunden würde.
     Mit besten Wünschen und vorzüglichster Hochachtung

Beilagen:
Economist, 13.-19.1.90, S.19ff; WSJ, 16.1.90, Manuskript 31.12.89; SDN-Sammlung von CR-Verträgen; WSJ, 13.2.90.

     The European Economic Space presently under negotiations cannot save the European Community. Not even if the EC were thus to be integrated into the European Free Trade Association,rather than the other way around, as the EC President still seems to work for.

     That's no bad news. Neither for the entrepreneur anywhere. Nor for the just reborn European democracies - who still find themselves locked out from the design and construction departments of this New European House. Having just escaped from one tutelage, these newly sovereign States deserve better - and not to be hoodwinked to bend to new Orwellian masters.

     After 30 years of benign neglect by Member governments who were only too glad to send their socialists to Brussels, it should surprise no one that the supranational structures they designed "to contain the German clout" is now irreparably out of step with the course of history. We ought to be grateful to all those who, like the British Prime Minister, despite rampant Europhoria, seek to keep their countries - and Europe - off the road to where Gorbatchev and his reformer friends struggle to extract their trapped fellow-citizens from. A symptomatic, and at that a particularly unkind cut is the EC's sly offer to unsuspecting COMECON countries to conclude seemingly advantageous bilateral cooperation agreements. Besides weakening their sovereignty in favor of the EC bureaucracy - for a plate of lentils, that is - many of these agreements would directly jeopardize the dormant most-favored-nation rights contained in their commerce treaties with most EC States.

     These treaties constitute real treasures of libertarian principles, providing for tax, commerce, establishment, customs and other regional freedoms some of our peoples can now only dream about. Moreover, they take precedence over Community law by virtue of article 234 of the EC's fundamental Rome Treaty.

     In fact, the EC Council, on February 12, 1990, again provided for the official prorogation of 271 commerce treaties of EC Members with other States, some dating back to 1815. These include the invaluable treaties of the United States with all but two EC Member States (Portugal and Spain).

     Like Great Britain - with its on-going "special relationship" with the United States - France, Austria, Switzerland, Malta, Turkey, and the East European countries have indeed too valuable cultural and historical assets and bridging functions between Europe and non-European States for them to be politically unionized. They would lose their identity - in a hamburger design such as that coming to light under the centralized EC structure. The some 200'000 pages of mostly self-serving new regulations the EC produces annually for "guidance" of Europe's entrepreneurs speak for themselves. Can such a new Tower of Babel serve the citizens?

     The citizen's welfare, too depends on viable markets, on individuals and enterprises capable and willing to play it. Yet, to hassel its players, to regulate it towards extinction, continues to be the bureaucrats' privilege everywhere.

     Mobilizing Europe's dormant potential thus requires political decentralization and even devolution, but not supra-nationalism, centralization and plain-levelling. Only the former provide the fertile terrains, the preconditions, for needed growth and development in harmony with the environment. With that, open markets, borders, universities and minds and, of course, real value currencies, could again work wonders.

     What is called for is the Old Continent's responsible citizen-entrepreneurs, the homo oeconomicus, rather than the apparatschniks here and there, to be again the masters and driving forces of Europe's future. For societies, not unlike economies, can only advance as much and as fast as they succede in unlocking the individual's creativity - which thrives most in small units. For all that to really happen, society needs to find its way to honor again another human right, i.e. the right to undisclosed private property.

     In contrast, the present concept for an European Economic Space testifies to official mediocrity. It must be revised in favor of a new EC - the European Confederation, as proposed by T.G. Masaryk, Aristide Briand, Gustave Stresemann, Charles de Gaulle, Franz-Joseph Strauss, François Mitterrand and Margaret Thatcher.

     Its key tasks should be to assure the continent-wide peaceful transition from State tutelage to individual liberties and responsibilities, thus safeguarding and promoting not the bureaucratic, but the historic, cultural and social "acquis" of both Western and Eastern, Northern and Southern Europe.

     Along those lines, e.g. France's, Germany's and Italy's agricultural problems could be resolved by honoring their farmers's rôle as water guardians. Europe's water castle, Switzerland, could also resolve its labor, frontaliers and transit problems with its partners on the basis of existing treaties. As such, they provide a practical alternative to working out complicated new treaties entailing ratification risks.

     E.g. immaginative French diplomats might thus not only get their hands strengthened vis-à-vis their increasingly powerful German counterparts.  Switzerland could also be asked to finally honor old treaty obligations - some providing for the withdrawal of the Swiss customs from all of Geneva.

     The called-for boldness for shaping Europe's future might thus not consist in designing some fancy new framework. Europe may be rediscovered by looking at its roots, by reanimating and applying forgotten old treaties, e.g. on regional free zones. It may best be served with a refocused, envigorated and enlarged Council of Europe. And its most effective single manifestation may be found in placing the public trust back into the individual citizen, his judgement and, yes, his sense of social responsibility. In short:
Give Europe back to its Citizens!

Observations générales

L'agriculture européenne en général est atteintes de graves maladies: politique de protection réactive, nerveuse, souvent mal équilibrée et trop peu soucieuse des effets écologiques, dans un environnement de marché dit libre, avec des résultats fâcheux pour les agriculteurs ainsi que pour les sols agricoles, les ressources d'eau et l'infrastructure de transport. Les pressions exercées dans le cadre des négociations du GATT en faveur d'une libéralisation générale du marché agricole n'arrangent pas les choses (il convient de noter que le paysan européen a l'habitude d'apporter à la terre, tandis que les managers des grandes plaines américaines ont une tradition de puiser le sol pour réduire leurs frais). En effet, les soucis des paysans de cette région et des maréchaires genevois exigent une autre optique.

Etant intégrée dans les marchés européens et nationaux, l'agriculture du bassin lémanique ne peut actuellement, d'une façon significative, échapper à ces maladies. Cependant, elle a une chance unique de s'en sortir - à condition que ses acteurs et partenaires, en accord avec les autorités de part et d'autre, s'inspireront davantage des particularités régionales, des racines historiques et des données de la nature (p.ex. ce bassin fait partie intégrante du château d'eau de l'Europe).

Eléments particuliers

Les agriculteurs partout ont toujours eu, et garderont dans toutes les sociétés, d'importantes fonctions non-alimentaires (comme c'est reconnu p.ex. dans la législation suisse pour la sauvegarde de l'environnement de haute montagne; il s'agit de la protection contre les avalanches, le maintien des voies de communications, le soin des espaces de récréation et du tourisme, etc.). Suite à l'industrialisation, l'importance de la sauvegarde de l'eau par les paysans a été quelque peu perdu de vue. Or, la société toute entière commence à se rendre compte de la gravité de cette négligence. En effet, l'exploitation des ressources de l'eau à des fins énergétiques a graduellement érodé la responsabilité des paysans pour l'aménagement de l'eau. Conséquences: productions agricoles intenses selon des priorités essentiellement dictés par le marché et sans références prioritaires aux impératifs d'un aménagement sain de l'eau; pollution de l'eau de surface ainsi que des eaux souterrains; sécheresse. Tout ce cercle vicieux est à revoir d'urgence.

Comme pour le maintien des bisses dans le Valais, les agriculteurs doivent à nouveau devenir les premiers gardiens de l'eau. Chacun doit avoir des responsabilités précises pour l'utilisation et l'écoulement de l'eau des terrains qu'il travaille ou que les autorités ont soumis à sa surveillance. Cette fonction doit être rémunérée, p.ex. par un droit d'eau (Wasserzins) qui incitera chaque paysan d'inscrire toute sa production agricole dans un régime strict et efficace de sauvegarde de l'eau. Cela devrait lui assurer une base économique solide, permettant une production agricole d'une moindre intensité des produits dits écologiques (p.ex. produits avec un minimum de pesticides naturels ou traditionnels) qui trouveront un écoulement économique dans la région de production. Pour couvrir le déficit éventuel des besoins alimentaires de la région, ce marché devrait être libre de toute discrimination ou contrainte douanière ou autre pour tous produits certifiés d'être produits selon un standard écologique non inférieur à celui pratiqué dans la région. Une bourse agricole interrégionale (fonctionnant comme le FLEUROPE) pourrait servir à éviter des transports évitables des produits agricoles de qualité comparable. L'écoulement des produits p.ex. vers le marché de Genève peut aussi être facilité par un aménagement des chemins de fer côté Haute Savoie (permettant, nota bene, un lien par TGV de Genève à Milan par Evian, le Valais et évt. le Val d'Aoste).

Grâce aux traités toujours en vigueur concernant notamment des zones franches [www.solami.com/douane.htm], des droits de transit, des libertés de commerce et d'établissement [voir aussi le Postulat Stähelin 04.3464: www.solami.com/commercetreaties.htm], et du marché libre de Genève, le bassin lémanique se prête d'une façon extraordinaire à développer rapidement de telles nouvelles solutions pour son marché agricole. Précédant la création de la Communauté européenne en 1957, ces traités, selon l'article 234 du Traité de Rome, priment explicitement tout le droit de la CE - c.à.d. les anciennes libertés de commerce etc. inscrites dans ces traités sont donc à l'abri de toute réglementation contraire de la bureaucratie de Bruxelles. Le bassin lémanique pourrait même servir comme modèle pour d'autres régions de la nouvelle Europe. Toujours faut-il que les agriculteurs et les consommateurs de cette région développent la volonté et la capacité de transformer de telles idées en réalité - et que les décideurs politiques s'y prennent aussi avec clairvoyance et vigueur.

(extract from "On the Ideal Nation", p.11):

B                 SOME MEMORABLE QUOTES FROM CENTESIMUS ANNUS

     "Rerum Novarum [the Encyclical published 100 years ago by Pope  Leo XIII] is opposed to State control of the means of production, which would reduce every citizen to being a "cog" in the State machine.  It is no less forceful in criticizing a concept of the State which completely excludes the economic sector from the State's range of interest and action.  There is certainly a legitimate sphere of autonomy in economic life which the State should not enter.  The State, however, has the task of determining the juridical framework within which economic affairs are to be conducted, and thus safeguarding the prerequisites of a free economy, which presumes a certain equality between the parties, such that one party would not be so powerful as practically to reduce the other to subservience.  In this regard, Rerum Novarum [and now also: Centesimus Annus] points the way to just reform which can restore dignity to work as the free activity of man."  (p.31)

     Pope Leo XIII, in Rerum Novarum, "frequently insists on necessary limits to the State's intervention and on its instrumental character, inasmuch as the individual, the family and society are prior to the State, and inasmuch as the State exists in order to protect their rights and not stifle them." (p.23)

    Commenting on the "question of the working class" at a time when "socialism" was "not yet in the form of a strong and powerful State" producing deeply penetrating - and still lingering - effects on other societies, institutions and States, Leo XIII recognized "the evil of a solution which, by appearing to reverse the positions of the poor and the rich, was in reality detrimental to the very people whom it was meant to help.  The remedy would prove worse than the sickness.  By defining the nature of the socialism of his day as the suppression of private property, Leo XIII arrives at the crux of the problem."  (p.25/26)

    "...the principle of subsidiarity must be respected: a community of a higher order should not interfere in the internal life of a community of a lower order, depriving the latter of its functions, but rather should support it in case of need and help to coordinate its activity with the activities of the rest of society, always with a view to the common good." (p.94)

     "By intervening directly and depriving society of its responsibility, the Social Assistance State leads to a loss of human energies and an inordinate increase of public agencies, which are dominated more by bureaucratic ways of thinking than by concern for serving their clients, and which are accompanied by an enormous increase in spending.  In fact, it would appear that needs are best understood and satisfied by people who are closest to them and who act as neighbours to those in need."  (p.95)

     "The individual today is often suffocated between two poles represented by the State and the marketplace.  At times it seems as though he exists only as a producer and consumer of goods, or as an object of State administration.  People lose sight of the fact that life in society has neither the market nor the State as its final purpose, since life itself has a unique value which the State and the market must serve."  (p.97)

     The Pope points out "a crisis within democracies themselves, which seem at times to have lost the ability to make decisions aimed at the common good.  Certain demands which arise within society are sometimes not examined in accordance with criteria of justice and morality, but rather on the basis of the electoral or financial power of the groups promoting them.  With time, such distortions of political conduct create distrust and apathy, with a substantial decline in the political participation and civic spirit of the general population, which feels abused and disillusioned.  As a result, there is a growing inability to situate particular interests within the framewoork of a coherent vision of the common good.  The latter is not simply the sum total of particular interests; rather it involves an assessment and integration of those interests on the basis of a balanced hierarchy of values; ultimately, it demands a correct understanding of the dignity and the rights of the person."  (p.92)

     "A person who produces something other than for his own use generally does so in order that others may use it after they have paid a just price, mutually agreed upon through free bargaining.  It is precisely the ability to foresee both the needs of others and the combinations of productive factors most adapted to satisfying those needs that constitutes another important source of wealth in modern society.  Besides, many goods cannot be adequately produced through the work of an isolated individual; they require the cooperation of many people in working towards a common goal.  Organizing such a productive effort, planning its duration in time, making sure that it corresponds in a positive way to the demands which it must satisfy, and taking the necessary risks - all this too is a source of wealth in today's society.  In this way, the role of disciplined and creative human work and, as an essential part of that work, initiative and entrepreneurial ability becomes increasingly evident and decisive."  (p.62)

     "Indeed, besides the earth, man's principle resource is man himself. ...  Important virtues are involved in [the process to transform man's natural and human environment], such as diligence, industriousness, prudence in undertaking reasonable risks, reliability and fidelity in interpersonal relationships, as well as courage in carrying out decisions which are difficult and painful but necessary, both for the overall working of a business and in meeting possible set-backs.

     The modern business economy has positive aspects.  Its basis is human freedom exercised in the economic field, just as it is exercised in many other fields.  Economic activity ... includes the right to freedom, as well as the duty of making responsible use of freedom.  ... Whereas at one time the decisive factor of production was the the land, and later capital - understood as a total complex of the instruments of production - today the decisive factor is increasingly man himself, that is, his knowledge, especially his scientific knowledge, his capacity for interrelated and compact organization, as well as his ability to perceive the needs of others and to satisfy them."  (p.63)

     "[C]an it perhaps be said that, after the failure of Communism, capitalism is the victorious social system, and that capitalism should be the goal of the countries now making efforts to rebuild their economy and society?  Is this the model which ought to be proposed to the countries of the Third World which are searching for the path to true economic and civil progress?

     The answer is obviously complex.  If by "capitalism" is meant an economic system which recognizes the fundamental and positive role of business, the market, private property and the resulting responsibility for the means of production, as well as free human creativity in the economic sector, then the answer is certainly in the affirmative, even though it would perhaps be more appropriate to speak of a "business economy", "market economy" or simply "free economy".  But if by "capitalism" is meant a system in which freedom in the economic sector is not circumscribed within a strong juridical framework which places it at the service of human freedom in its totality, and which sees it as a particular aspect of that freedom, the core of which is ethical and religious, then the reply is certainly negative."  (p.81/82)

     "Man fulfils himself by using his intelligence and freedom.  In so doing he utilizes the things of this world as objects and instruments and makes them his own.  The foundation of the right to private initiative and ownership is to be found in this activity.  By means of his work man commits himself, not only for his own sake but also for others and with others.  Each person collaborates in the work of others and for their good.  ... Just as the person fully realizes himself in the free gift of self, so too ownership morally justifies itself in the creation, at the proper time and in the proper way, of opportunities for work and human growth for all."  (p.84/85)

     "Widespread drug use is a sign of a serious malfunction in the social system; it also implies a materialistic and, in a certain sense, destructive "reading" of human needs.   In this way the innovative capacity of a free economy is brought to a one-sided and inadequate conclusion.  Drugs, as well as pornography and other forms of consumerism which exploit the frailty of the weak, tend to fill the resulting void."  (p.72)

     "It is not wrong to want to live better; what is wrong isa style of life which is presumed to be better when it is directed towards "having" rather than "being", and which wants to have more, not in order to be more but in order to spend life in enjoyment as an end in itself.  It is therefore necessary to create life-styles in which the quest for truth, beauty, goodness and communion with others for the sake of common growth are the factors which determine consumer choices, savings and investments.  In this regard, it is not a matter of the duty of charity alone, that is the duty to give from one's "abundance", and sometimes even out of one's needs, in order to provide what is essential for the life of a poor person.  I am referring to the fact that even the decision to invest in one place rather than another, in one productive sector rather than another, is always a moral and cultural choice.  Given the utter necessity of certain economic conditions and of political stablity, the decision to invest, that is, to offer people an opportunity to make good use of their own labour, is also determined by an attitude of human sympathy and trust in Providence, which reveal the human quality of the person making such decisions."  (p.72/73)

(see also: "Vivant Sequentes - an appeal by the Mosul Vilayet Council to all men and women of good will" and "SLM - Outline of a Linguistic, Cultural and Religious Common Denominator")

(extract from "On the Ideal Nation", p.23):

D 700 YEARS-OLD SWITZERLAND: AN EXAMPLE WORTH LOOKING AT?

When in 1291 three liberty-minded Citizens representing the inhabitants of three valleys in the center of Europe's alps promised to assist each other in fending off the imposition of foreign rule, taxes and judges, they laid the basis for one of the most durable and instructive experiments in nation-building.  4 languages rich Switzerland has its roots in the French, German, Italian and Romansch cultures. As Europe's water castle, it also gives birth to four of Europe's most important rivers (Rhine, Rhône, Po and Donau).  Perhaps then a look at what the Swiss Founding Fathers really agreed upon in 1291 may be of interest not only to those seeking inspiration for addressing actual nationality problems, but also to those trying to fathom what may have lead Heidyland off its successful original track.  Here then is a translation of Switzerland's basic document:
 

 THE SWISS FEDERAL PACT OF 1291

In the name of God, the Almighty, amen.

It is accomplishing an honorable and beneficial action for the public well-being to confirm in the established forms the conventions aimed at peace and security.
[1.] Let it be known to everybody, considering the prevailing evil and in order to better defend and maintain, in their integrity, their families and their property, that the  People of the  valleys of  Uri, Schwyz and Unterwalden, in good faith, have pledged to assist each other with help, with advice and with  all favors, persons and goods, inside their valleys and beyond, with all their power and resourcefulness, against all and against anybody nourishing bad intentions or who committed a crime, an offense or an injustice against any one or more of them, or concerning their property.
[2.] Each Community has pledged to come to the aid of the other, whenever that is necessary, to help against and, in as much as that is indicated, at its own costs, to resist and revenge the attacks of ill-intended people, having previously made such an oath which is herewith effectively renewed,
[3.] notwithstanding  each person's  right, to the best of its abilities, to be obedient and helpful to his [or her] master.
[4.] After joint consultations, we have also unanimously agreed, set and ordered that the People of the above-named valleys will, under no circumstances, receive or accept a judge who is not one of us [i.e. a resident Citizen], or who has bought his judgeship with money or any kind of favor on any way.
[5.] Should a difference occur among any of the Confederates, it is incumbent on those who carry the  most respect  to intervene and  appease the difference with the most effective means considered indicated.  All other Confederates shall unite against the party which refuses the [arbitration] sentence.
[6.] Also they have agreed to the following rules to be observed:  He who, with intent and without being provoked, caused somebody's death, shall, as is indicated by the infamy of this crime and unless he can show his innocence, be put to death when he is caught; if he escaped he shall never be allowed to return.  Those giving shelter and protection to such an evil person shall be banned from these valleys unless the Confederates have called them back.
[7.] He who, with intent, by day or in the dark of the night, set fire to the property of a Confederate, shall have  lost forever his rights as a member of our Communities, and he who shelters and protects this offender shall in our valleys compensate the injured.
[8.] Moreover, the property in the valleys of any Confederate who, by way of robbery or otherwise, inflicted any damage on the property of any other Confederate, shall be sequestrated in as much as is needed to compensate said damage in due course.
[9.] Also, nobody among ourselves shall seize the other's property without a valid public title or a guarantee, and then  only with a special authorization from his [the competent] judge.
[10.] Each one shall be obedient to his judge and if that becomes necessary, shall indicate the judge which he is prepared to recognize.
[11.] Whoever opposes or refuses obedience to a [competent] court and thus causes damage to anyone among us, shall be liable to render satisfaction which is to be enforced by all other Confederates.
[12.] Should war or a conflict break out among the Confederates and one party refuses to respect the laws and customs, all other Confederates shall protect the other party.
[13.] The above-mentioned  laws, set as they are in the  interest and for the benefit of all, shall, God permitting, remain in force forever. In witness whereof the present act, set up at the request of the aforesaid, has been validated with the affixed seals of the above-mentioned Communities and valleys.  Done at the beginning of August in the year of the Lord 1291.
        (translation by the editor)

 *       *       *

In a nutshell, the answer may be:

- Geographic proximity of like-minded people distrusting even next-door neighbors until they have proven their merits,
- strong local government and,
- above all: "beware of foreign judges and laws."

Switzerland's sovereign political entities, its 26 cantons, still evolve.  Some of them continue to split, like the Canton of Berne which is about to transfer sovereignty over part of its territory to the Canton of Basel-Landschaft and which, 10 years ago, even gave birth to the Republic and Canton of Jura.  Others, notably the Republic and Canton of Geneva, seem to be moving again into a more independent orbit (see chapter on Geneva).  Sometimes the Swiss government is overrun by events; it also has its wings cut by the popular vote (see Switzerland's unique UN votes).  And it may happen again with the government's handling of Switzerland's relations with the - as presently setup - moribund EC.

Modern Switzerland, in 1848, was largely modeled after the United States and its Constitution.  It managed to survive virtually unscathed the tempests ravaging Europe in the first half of this century.  This has been recognized to be due, to no small degree, to its policy of permanent armed neutrality resulting from events in 1515 when, in the battle of Marignano, Swiss soldiers of fortune fought each other because of service on opposing sides.  An agrarian state until the last century, the evolution of its society and economy is seen to have benefited decisively from the influx of enterprising foreigners from its major European and American trading partners who were encouraged to settle freely by way of fully valid friendship, commerce and establishment treaties which, symptomatically, are being mostly ignored in practice.

In recent years, the thus developed basis of Switzerland's enviable prosperity has indeed been undermined by official neglect of individual rights and - no less alarmingly - of fundamental sovereignty and fiscal principles.  Pressures of neighboring governments and, particularly, American officials working in growing factual power vacuums have been allowed to cause havoc on the libertarian structures and laws of the country (e.g. the published and the unpublished cooperation agreements and, more visible, the growing numbers of lex americana universalis, i.e. the laws against insider trading, money laundering, and export controls).

These testimonies to friendliness bordering on servility and worse would, of course, be quite worthy of abanana republic.  Another question is whether they are compatible with the dignity of an independent country like Switzerland with its rich cultural inheritance.  And, as indicated before, still another question is:

 "What are the true objectives of some of the strong-arm measures several US administrations have persistently used against Switzerland, against Swiss citizens and Swiss residents and which have been hidden most effectively behind an evident smokescreen of cunningly well-chosen and unobjectionable titles and purported aims?" (see footnotes 18-20).

On its present course, Switzerland may indeed not continue to be a successful experiment in political, economic and social engineering.  For indications are that on this course it may have been successful despite, rather than because of its leader's actions and inactions.  That, of course, would not exactly be assuring.  Particular significance thus falls on the question of another "invisible hand" - that of U.S. judges and U.S. officials and their effective reach into Switzerland.
 

 EOTHER ALARM SIGNALS

 Pacta sunt servanda?  Not invented here!
  We have LEX AMERICANA, and PAX AMERICANA is around the corner!

The Court approved recourse to the national means of coercion - such as the subpoena power and contempt of court citations - if they promise quicker results at less costs, i.e. whenever  "Convention procedures would be unduly time-consuming and expensive, and less likely to produce needed evidence than direct use of the Federal Rules." (#85.-1695).

"The Court's view of this country's international obligations is particularly unfortunate."

 "We will not appoint justices, ... sheriffs, or bailiffs, except of such as know the law of the kingdom and are of a mind to keep it well." (art.45)

However, this opportunistic disregard for fundamental legal principles and treaty obligations formally entered into by the United States also consti-tutes an illegal exercise of power.  For this blatently arrogated and executed treaty breaking power not only severely undercuts the U.S. President's treaty-making power, but it also flies in the face of the U.S. Senate's constitutional advice and consent rôle and, moreover, is not seen to be compatible with either the text or the background of the U.S. Constitution's respective provisions.  Indeed, in their Declaration of Independence of July 4, 1776, the Representatives of the United States invoked notably

 "the Laws of Nature", their "unalienable Rights" and "attempts by the [British] legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us" as "causes which impel them to the separation" and the independent pursuit of "Liberty ... Safety and Happiness."

 "The President shall ... have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make [and abrogate] treaties, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur" (art.2, sec.2, al.2).
 "The Congress shall have power: ...  To define and punish offenses against the law of nations" (art.1, sec.8, al.10).
 "No State shall ... pass any ... law impairing the obligation of contracts ...  No State shall, without the consent of Congress, enter into any agreement [or dispute] ... with a foreign power, or engage in war" (art.1, sec.10, al.1 and 3).
 "The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority" (art.3, sec.2,al.1).
 "This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land" (art.6,al.2).

 "No State shall ... pass any ... law impairing the obligation of contracts [or reaching beyond its jurisdiction]"  (which is seen as the real meaning of art.1, sec.10, al.1).
 "This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be [in harmony with the law of nations, thus constituting] the supreme law of the land" (which is seen as the real meaning of art.6, al.2).

We would like to believe that this was indeed what theformer Swiss Attorney General, Professor Dr.Hans Walder, had in mind when, with his "LEGAL OPINION" of October 26, 1981, he advised his friends at the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on how to break the Swiss bank secrecy without exposing the banks in question to Swiss criminal proceedings.  Walder's advice :

 Create a "STATE OF NECESSITY ... FOR EXAMPLE, A VERY HIGH FINE, IMPRISONMENT OR LOSS OF LICENCE TO CARRY OUT BANKING TRANSACTIONS IN THE U.S. ... WITH THE CONSEQUENCE THAT HE [the competent Swiss judge] COULD NOT PUNISH THE PERSON INVOLVED."

Not surprisingly, some Swiss lawmakers thus wanted Walder to be tried for economic high treason.  But they eventually threw in the towel upon learning of Walder's possibly very ancient source of inspiration, and after considering the argument with which the then Minister of Justice Häberlin, in 1928, fought in Parliament against the adoption of the penal clause (art.267 CP) that would have to serve as basis for prosecution:

 "If all those Swiss officials [after they came home with "abgesägten Hosen" and were thus ostracized] had been brought to court for their bungling and damaging of Swiss interests while dealing with foreign powers, I wonder how many officials would now be in prison."

 "clearly demonstrate that use of a subpoena to obtain foreign records is a powerful weapon which the department will vigorously support in appropriate cases ... [though that might raise] various questions of infringement of foreign sovereignty ... [in which] regard several countries have recently lodged strong protests with both the state and justice departments against the use of such subpoenas. We have rejected these protests and do not intend to relinquish the hard fought gains we have won in this battle, but we do want to seize upon this opportunity to convert these protests into offers of assistance by the countries concerned."

Further down the road, in another unfamous case , the New York Times headlined its editorial "This is Gun-boat Law", saying:

 "According to the Supreme Court's peculiar reasoning last week, the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution does not protect a foreigner from a warrantless search by Americans of his home in his own country, or from use of seized evidence at his trial in America.  This 6 to 3 decision is to jurisprudence what gunboat are to diplomacy."

 "What we plan for is that we're a superpower.  We are the major player on the world stage with responsibilities around the world."

 "Haven't the foggiest [idea], I don't know.  That's the whole point.  We don't know like we used to know."

The U.K. High Court, on April 4, 1991, upheld an order for Nazir Chinoy, a manager of the Luxembourg-based BCCI (Bank of Credit and Commerce International) to be extradited to the U.S. to stand trial for allegedly taking part in a conspiracy to launder profits from illegal drugs - despite allegations that the evidence against Mr.Chinoy was obtained in breach of the European Convention on Human Rights.  Lord Justice Thomas Bingham said

 "That convention, for better or for worse, is not part of the law of this country."

This is another example of how rules originally intended to safeguard interests of the Citizen have been lost sight of, respectively have gradually been voided or turned to the relative advantage of the state institutions.  For said, in effect, deprivative British rule seems to have its origin in the 1627 Petition of Right, whereby the King granted in Parliament that

 "no man hereafter be compelled to make or yield any gift, loan, benevolence, tax, or such like charge without common consent by Act of Parliament, and that none be called to make answer or take such oath or to give attentance or be confined or otherwise molested or disquieted concerning the same or for refusal thereof."

(extract from "On the Ideal Nation", p.31):

F    A RUSSIAN COMMONWEALTH AS A LEADER OF EUROPE'S REGENERATION?

A look at some roots
In 1914, the Russian Empire, after its 1867 sale of Alaska to the United States, was limited to an area which embraced most of the Euro-Asian continent.  It included Finland, the Baltic States, Poland and Moldavia in Europe and stretched all the way to Vladivostok and beyond (excepting e.g. the Kurile islands).

As was common practice then, the Russian diplomats, too had woven a dense network of bilateral commerce agreements, thus securing its industry and commerce most-favored-nation status with most of its trading partners in Europe, the Americas and the Far East (38).  Neither Lenin nor any of his successors abrogated these treaties; they may thus be dormant and avail themselves for reanimation by able diplomats.

Expanded trade and commerce will be crucial for those charged with the Herculian task of cleaning up the economic mess brought about by over 70 years of mismanagement of human and natural resources.  In the event, the reanimation or recovery of such fundamental, even if ancient rights, might significantly contribute to the viability also of those republics which have already chosen, or which may yet opt for genuine independence.  And their leaders, too may thus strengthen the chances of success of their perestroika programs by seeing to it that these key principles will be heeded on every administrative level:

Reforms must aim for conditions liberating and responsibilizing Citizens, and they may be considered to be successful only if
-  Citizens will be less inclined to emigrate, and more inclined to seek fulfilment in their own regenerated environment,
-  foreign professionals will be more willing to come, reside and work in the land, and
-  foreign capital will be more attracted to come and stay in the country.

 "The grave emergency situations prevailing in the Soviet Union entail the danger of huge new refugee movements to burden and destabilise the internal order of its neighbors.  Thus, it behooves the West to render [effective] assistance to the Soviet Union in its perestroika policy, on its way to Europe and in its efforts to integrate itself into the world economy.
      Nobody can have an interest at distabilizing the Soviet Union; it would entail a high risk for Western Europe, but also for the United States and the whole of the Western World. ...
      The Federal Republic of Germany also contributes substantially to the financial efforts to stabilize the Soviet Union.  The contributions agreed upon 1990 alone reach almost DM$25 billion [some $15 billion] ...  With these funds we also contribute significantly to the stabilization of Europe's security order which, all by itself, was a precondition for bringing about the East-West coalition against the aggressor Saddam Hussein.  Unfortunately, this aspect is often neglected when Germany's contribution to the Gulf war is being discussed. ...
      Credits without reforms - that amounts to filling a bottomless barrel. ...    Important as governmental support for assistance is, really decisive is the availability of privately raised capital and the [lasting] willingness of Western enterprises to take risks in the Soviet Union.  This, however, in reality is badly lacking. ...  And there is no sign that conditions will change soon, for the reasons responsible for this Western investment restraint essentially remain unchanged.  ...   After five years of reforms there should be light [at the end of the tunnel].  [Yet darkness prevails and] this discredits the entire reform enterprise. ...
      One cannot speak of a comprehensive [coherent] concept for a market economy as long as their is no [solid] commitment to the unconstraint right to private property, notably to real estate, as long as the prices are not truly decontrolled, or as long as essential decisions are merely rolled over to [essentially unprepared] Union republics.  Doubts are being aggravated when at the same time all sorts of new central plans pop up and are [seriously] being considered at the Council of Ministers.
      [For private foreign investors it is revealing, sobering and] of signal importance that to date none of the adopted reform programs seriously questioned the ideological linchpins of socialism, namely the preeminent role of the national plan and the keeping in the hands of the state the means of production, notably the [arable] land. ...  Barter trading, black market, speculation in [scarce] goods of all sorts are on the upswing and have attained Union-wide dimensions.  This development demonstrates that there can be no successful mixed economy and that such experiments [can be no real substitute] to consequently and rapidly executed genuine market economy reforms. ...
      Investors look for legal security; it is absent in an atmosphere of [uncertain and hesitant lawmakers], vacilating and even contradictory reforms, rules and regulations, unstable and ill-defined competences on the various levels of the Republics and the Union.  Investors need flexibility, [mobility and effectively operating telecom services] which the planned economy does not provide them.  They are not encouraged [to either come or stay with their funds in the USSR] if the currency they earned cannot be converted, if they are not free to transfer their earnings abroad and if bank services are lacking. ...  Neither production and delivery constraints, nor an inadequate infrastructure are good for business.  Moreover, invincible bureaucratism, lacking transparency [and reliability] of who is competent [to decide what], and permit procedures [whose outcome sometimes reflects more a lottery than a governmental agency bound by the rule of law] are anathema to any economic activity everywhere.  Dynamic small private enterprises, which regularly spearhead the technological advances [and which, in modern society, increasingly constitute the economy's driving force] cannot realistically be expected to contemplate working under such [demotivating, productivity-slashing] conditions. ...
      As if it were intended to drive away even the most stoic and undeterred of the remaining private investors, the Presidential Decree against economic sabotage of January 26, 1991, provides for the KGB and others to have unrestrained round-the-clock access to all offices and facilities of enterprises and organisations, including joint-ventures, to check their books, storages and available funds and[, at will,] to take possession of company documents.  This, of course, can be no fertile ground for investments to flourish, and it creates a climate and conditions where foreign capital is all but attracted.  What's more, it flies in the face of treaties in force ..."

In 1816 some exceptional volcanic eruptions caused the sunlight to be significantly reduced, resulting in 1817 in a sharp fall in agricultural output over much of Europe.  Part of Switzerland was hit by famine and Zar Alexander I manifested his solidarity with the affected Swiss through a gift of 100000 gold rubles (56).  Swiss dairy farmers, cheese makers, sheep raisers, mechanics and other professionels gladly returned the favour by going in numbers to Russia, until the beginning of this century, in order to help develop notably that country's milk, wool and textile production.

Solidarity and genuine freedom of movement and settlement made it possible then to effectively assist each other, to help each other out.  Will today's leaders still find inspiration in such time-tested wisdoms and down-to-earth simple recipes when they seek answers to today's pressing needs?  Or will they listen only when
high-tech and big projects involving big money (affording kickbacks à la Marcos) are at issue?

Admittedly, the above-specified situation in the Soviet Union appears to be one big mess requiring big means.  And may be the ever-more persistently called-for breaking up of not only the economic, but first and above all the political problem parcel into smaller and perhaps more manageable problem units will indeed offer, in some instances and problem areas, some viable long-term solutions.

As pointed out before, a country's size - as a general rule - can play an important role but by and for itself is determinent neither for a state's failure, nor for its successful survival.  And if the Citizenry in Vladivostok may benefit from some properly devised and competently managed local customs free zone eventually attracting notably Japanese investment, so may the Citizenry of Leningrad from similar - and actually planned - nearby free zones (57).  But in order to draw maximum benefits from such - in fact from any other - institutional advantages, the Citizens attracted to these zones have to be street-wise, i.e. they must have professional qualities, such as motivation, discipline and commercial talents enabling them to succeed in a competitive environment.  All of which requires well-focused and adapted educational efforts and training programs for people who are or
can be motivated to take their destiny essentially into their own hands.  And that is where the above observations of Pope John Paul II can become real social and economic catalysts which deserve thewidest possible dissemination and debate.

In order for the Soviet Citizen - and essentially any other Citizen - to be motivated to work harder, he must become convinced that the fruits of his labour are really going to be and to remainhis, that he can truly enjoy them the way he sees fit, and that he is really going to be free to decide when, where and under what conditions he may invest whatever savings he's made.

As only a relatively small part of the working population manages to overcome the administrative hurdles still tied to the exercise of independent professions - which, incidently, is an alarmingly growing phenomenon in all Western countries too - the demonstration effect alone cannot be relied upon.  This holds true even if all these independent activities (e.g. of lawyers, consultants, money changers, etc.) were promptly relieved of
unnecessary administrative burdens and were fully decriminalized (a measure which is anyway highly indicated and recommended).

Still, it is the Citizen's independent activity which is seen as the individually most rapid and fruitful vehicle for significant economic progress favorably affecting the entire social fabric. The above-specified central condition for getting Citizens to work harder may thus require other measures, such as the introduction of a readily tradable, perhaps constitutionally gold-backed hard-currency, and a determined effort by the clergy to encourage the members of the church to consider the respective writings of the Pope.  As the public receptiveness for related spiritual guidance appears to be generally high in the newly reborn East-European
democracies, and highest in Russia, such a course of action could promote a groundswell positively affecting the business attitudes and practices even in the West.  Moreover, it could favorably, anddecicively at that, influence the relationship between the peoples of the Eastern and the Western parts of Europe.  And it could
facilitate the evolving structure of a Europe of perhaps over 30 sovereign countries providing for full preservation of their rich cultural heritage as the basis for their Citizens to truly and responsibly enjoy all economic and political freedoms (58).  This enchanting long-shot perspective should, however, in no way detract anybody from the actual grave situation which, as the basis for all real solutions, requires unrestricted openess and mutual goodwill.
 

Some paths to implement the people's real will

As pointed out elsewhere, the best case for devolution is that policies should be forged at the most local practical level.  This cardinal message seems increasingly to get accross to both the people and the leaders who are participating in the USSR's reform debate.  Attention might thus be focused on ways and means to help these processes.  One potent vehicle for helping along the indispensable educational and structural economic reforms may - paradoxically - be found in the military (59).  In a runaway environment the military often dispose over the best, if not the only, usable infrastruture and competence left both for containing the dangers of disintegration and chaos and for reconstructing a downtrodden society.  Soldiers with a motivating mission are, of course, more reliable than when there is lack of direction and occupation.  Moreover, enrooted in traditions of obligation, loyalty and professionalism, and used to discipline and receiving and executing orders, the military institutions of the nuclear-equipped Soviet Union may in fact become the West's most reliable important transitional partners (60).

Another potent instrument may be found in external political self-interest.  As detailed below, in June 1989,

    "West German Chancellor Helmut Kohl, and the Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, reached an  agreement to use [the Kaliningrad Oblast, the former German East Prussia, of the Russian Soviet Federated Socialist Republic, situated between Lithuania and Poland on the Baltic Sea] as the location for a German-populated constituent republic of the U.S.S.R.  ForBonn, this solution is seen as a means of stemming the flood of German emigres from the Soviet Union.  For Moscow, it is seen as a solution to an ethnic problem that has been dogging the Soviet Union for years." (61)

As indicated above, the Soviet Union, the Russian Commonwealth or whatever political entity eventually may be recognized as the legal successor to the Russian Empire, might yet benefit from the commerce agreements which the latter concluded with most of its traditional trading partners abroad.  Assuming further research to
confirm this preliminary finding, and - admittedly an even taller order - presuming the far-sightedness and indispensable political will in the capitals concerned to be either there or to be sufficiently mobilizable for such reanimation efforts to eventually overcome any opposition from the EC bureaucracy, the following
medium-term prospects arise:

1. The Soviet Union and all constituant parts of the 1917 Russian Empire, i.e. Russia, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland might be made to enjoy most-favored-nation trading  rights  with  several, if  not  all  EC Member States.  To that effect they and their interested Western trading partners might jointly invoke treaty rights preceding the EC's basic Treaty of Rome of 1957 (whose art.234 explicitly recognizes foregoing treaties to supercede all EC laws and regulations).  Both individually and as a group of nations, they thus might avail themselves of significant commercial rights with most EC States and the United States - similar to those of Czechoslovakia, Finland, Hungary, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, which date back to pre-communist rule and which are routinely confirmed by the EC's supreme Council of the European Communities, yet are mostly forgotten or are simply not applied.

2. The leadership of the Soviet Union and its constituant people may find it to be in the interest particularly of the present Soviet Union's core republics (i.e. those who will have ratified the April 23, 1991 agreement) to seek to develop a Europe-wide political-economic structure.  To this effect it may even take the initiative, eventually involving the EC, the European Free Trade Association and/or other suitable bodies.  And it might, with mutual benefit, seek to draw inspiration from the premature Briand/Stresemann plan (see chapter "Citizens' Europe).

3. The leadership particularly of the Soviet Union might want to develop and apply its military structures and forces to the herculian task of educating and training its people, particularly its youth, to meet challenges of today and tomorrow, including notably preparing themselves to become effective market players but, no less importantly, effective guardians of their environment, their ecological inheritance.

4. The low- and middle-level officials must be given the right to spend up to 50% less time on official business and to exercice independent functions compatible with, and not linked to his official duties - naturally with corresponding cuts in their salary and social benefits (62).

5. The leadership particularly of the Soviet Union might want to write into the Constitution the most effective direct promoters of market-relevant liberties, notably the right to ANONYMOUS, UNDISCLOSED private property.  It might want to substitute the income tax with a consumer tax which would become tailor-made in combination with a negative income tax.

6. The Soviet leadership in particular might want to benefit from the French Minitel experience by considering introducing not only modern telephone exchanges but placing priority on equipping all households with such cheap, simple and educationally instrumental intelligent end-user phone systems(63).

7. The Soviet leadership in particular might want to develop additional opportunities for promoting regional economic growth (e.g. by creating customs and tax free zones, mutual territorial leases involving suitable partners, like Japan for the Kuriles), and it might want to complement its sources and channels for earning hard currencies - e.g. through providing genuinely safe havens to capital fleeing fiscal confiscations - by way of special arrangements with competent representatives abroad.

      "Measures that really do promote industry (and the economy at large) are not usually regarded as 'industrial policy' at all.  Which perhaps explains why they are so often neglected.
      The best industrial policy is to keep inflation low, real interest rates gently positive and exchange rates stable. The people will save and businesses will be naturally far-sighted - ie. willing to take a chance on investments that might pay for themselves only after many years.  Without these conditions, nobody, not even a bureaucrat with many years' seniority, can guess what long-term investments will turn out to make sense.
      After this, the most promising industrial initiative is to invest in human capital: a well-educated labour force, able to aquire new skills and adapt to changing demands, is the most valuable asset an economy can have.  And governments need to invest adequately in infrastructure (such as roads), because there are good reasons for thinking that private businesses will not.  Macroeconomic stability, education and infrastructure are the elements of a boring industrial policy that would work."  (emphasis added)

In his enlightening contribution "The Awakening of a Fourth Baltic State" to The Wall Street Journal (10/20/90) the historian Johann Fink detailed said agreement between Chancellor Helmut Kohl, and President Mikhail Gorbachev, concerning the Kaliningrad Oblast [administrative department].  He wrote:

      "Until 1941, there was a German Soviet Republic, known as the Volga Autonomous Republic, located along the Volga River. Following the Axis invasion of the U.S.S.R., however, Stalin declared all Germans in the Soviet Union to be a fifth column of Hitler.  He thus dissolved the republic and exiled the Germans to the Central Asian republics of the U.S.S.R., especially Kazakhstan.  In 1945, when the Russian annexed the extreme northeast tip of Germany - i.e. the northern half of East Prussia - the German population was expelled; many lost their lives as they were herded west to camps for displaced persons.  Many ultimately settled in West Germany and Austria. ...
      The Kremlin also toyed with the idea of creating a German Republic in the northern corner of Kazakhstan.  But the Kazakhs, like the Russians, are unwilling to see their land divided up and staged demonstrations against the plan.  So the decision was made to place the new German Republic in the Kaliningrad Oblast, ....
      Last October, the proposal to establish a homeland for the German minority in the Soviet Union came one step closer to reality when the Soviet publication, Literatura Gazetty, queried its German readers about it.  More than 80% said they would prefer moving to northern East Prussia rather than migrate to West Germans.  A few weeks later, Moscow announced plans to attract Germans from various Soviet republics to settle in the Kaliningrad Oblast by proposing to rename the capital Kantgrad, in honor of Immanuel Kant [the great German philosopher who lived there]. ...
     Meanwhile on the economic front, the present government in the city of Kaliningrad is encouraging German tourism and also wants to have the Oblast declared a special economic zone, which is now under discussion by the Kremlin. ...
   Although this fourth Baltic state is only planning on becoming an autonomous republic within the Russian Republic, sovereignty may become an issue if Lithuania succeeds in seceding from the U.S.S.R.  If Lithuania is independent, the autonomous German Koenigsberg Republic would have no land connection with the remainder of the Soviet Union."

      "[Dr.F.Wilhelm] Christians, the chairman of the supervisory board of the Deutsche Bank ... believes that Kaliningrad could have a future as a free-trade zone linking east and west.
      When he first raised the idea with [Prime Minister Nikolaj Ryshkov and Foreign Minister Edward Shevardnadze in the Kremlin in 1988], he got little response.  Since then the Russian Federation has taken the initiative.  Last year the Russian parliament named Kaliningrad one of six potential free-trade zones to be set up within the Federation.
      A plan for the free-trade zone has been drawn up by Juri Matochkin, head of the Kaliningrad Technical Institute, and is awaiting approval from Russia's parliament."

In theory, this piece of land is governed by a never-abrogated, and thus revivable international treaty, i.e. the 1924 Memel Convention which involves United States rights and is signed by: France, Great Britain, Italy, Japan and Lithuania.  In practice, Stalin united it 1945 with the Lithuanian Soviet Socialist Republic.  Significantly, this other forgotten treaty provides indeed for the transfer to Lithuania of "all rights and titles ceded to them [i.e. the signatories]" (art.1).  But they also determined:

   "Rights of sovereignty over the Memel Territory or the exercise of such rights may not be transferred without the consent of the High Contracting Parties." (art.15)

   "The Harbour Board shall maintain the existing free zone and provide such extentions as the transit traffic may warrant, either by extending the present zone or by the creation of a new one.  In the latter event, the existing zone may be abolished if in such new free zone the traffic can be adequately dealt with."  (Annex, art.13)

The Lithuanian (68) and third party rights and obligations emanating from the 1924 Memel Convention, in the hands of visionary and competent politicans, might furthermore serve to help resolve some actual regional issues.  Belately rediscovering and honoring formal treaty obligations might in fact facilitate, in that region too, the realization of economic progress based on democracy, enterprising Citizens and the rule of law.  As such, this would seem to meet not only vital economic but eminently political interests of all concerned.

An International Baltic Conference might thus be called to these effects by the Soviet leadership.  It might involve notably France, Germany, Great Britain, Italy, Japan, Lithuania and the United States as the parties whose rights are affected by the Memel Convention.  And it might thus effectively draw on and even enhance the considerable goodwill some Soviet leaders' continue to command among Western politicians.  Conceivably, both the Memel Territory and the present Kaliningrad Oblast, with the help of Western and Arab investments and Soviet Jews emigrating there - instead of contributing further to the Mideastern problems - might thus indeed be turned into a most viable Baltic Hong Kong:  as a treaty-based international free zone contributing to regional stability, prosperity and security (69), which might be linked to a Russian or - why not? - a European Commonwealth inspiring full confidence and radiating mutually beneficial cultural, political and commercial impulses in all directions.

 1.     All Reforms must contribute to the achievement of conditions liberating and responsibilizing Citizens, and they may be considered to be successful only if

-     Citizens will be less inclined to emigrate, and more inclined to seek fulfilment in their own regenerated environment,

-     foreign professionals will be more willing to come, reside and work in the land, and

-     foreign capital will be more attracted to come and stay in the country.

 2.     Provide for the Citizens' and the nation's soul to be healed through guidance towards individual self-fulfilment, private property and social responsibility! (e.g. see the Encyclical Centesimus Annus by Pope John Paul II).

 3.     "Train and educate man!" Encourage particularly your people to widen their horizon and venture to foreign lands! Recognize and strengthen the Citizens abroad and reinstate those who have lost their Citizenship (they are all economic ambassadors)!

4. Shift the powers from the bureaucracy back to the Citizens!
A State's key responsibility - and source of legitimacy -, i.e. its capacity to safeguard its Citizens' pursuit of happiness, may be met most effectively through genuine liberation and responsabilization of the Citizen as its only real sovereign.

5.  Stop further cash criminalizations, decriminalize the market and reintroduce the original right to private property, i.e. the right to ANONYMOUS, UNDISCLOSED private property!

6.     Provide each household with an anti-Orwellian telephone, e.g. the French Minitel, for a tax-free electronic flea-market, for round-the-clock bartering, and for buying and selling all sorts of new and old goods and services.

7.     In as much as a society of genuinely free Citizens rightly rejects slavery, forced prostitution, etc.,
there can be only a willingness for, but no right to employment and dependent work which, essentially,
reflects a society's level of organization, notably its economy's - unemployment-prone - division of labor.
"Full industrial employment" - as long as the market provides for it - thus represents a mutually satisfactory anomaly; whereas unemployment (the risky part of this anomaly) expresses the individual's incapacity
and/or unwillingness to recognize, organize himself and exploit the economic opportunities which surround him everywhere.

________________

NOTES

38   E.g. its commerce and navigation treaty with France dates from March 20, 1874 and January 28, 1906, while its commerce treaty with Great Britain dates from the early 19th century.

53   "Investments and Joint-Ventures in the Soviet Union",  keynote address held March 1, 1991, at the "Forum Institut für Management", Munich

56   Parliamentary Question Hansjörg Weder, December 3, 1990.

57   Mathieu van Berchem, "Novgorod, entre Moscou et Leningrad, future zone de liberté économique", Tribune de Genève, 9 février 1991; see also: "Les Zones Franches en Europe", J.A.Keller (édit.), CORUM,
1989 Genève

58    Maurice Duverger, X.Pellegrini "Trente nations, une Communauté" Hébdo 12.4.91, A.Campiotti "Le continent de l'inquiétude, les incroyables scenarios" 2.11.89; Maurice Allais "Non à l'Europe de
Delors" FIGMAG, 15.12.90.

59   See particularly: "IRON MOUNTAIN REPORT -  On the Desirability and Feasibility of Peace", op.cit.  Also: William Pfaff, "Soviet Decay: When Only the Army Works", International Herald Tribune, May 31, 1991.

60   There can be no question of the military substituting themselves for the Citizens and the civilian authorities.  In the event, a national consensus would have to be developed as a prerequisite for any viable interim solution.  For Helmut Schmidt, "a Soviet military dictatorship aiming at transforming the Soviet centralised economy into a market economy would likely turn the failure of the economic reform attempts to date into a cataclysm, entailing the enhanced dangers of an external demonstration of its forces in order to compensate for internally unkept promises", "Der Niedergang des roten Reiches", op.cit. (authorized translation).

61   Johann Fink, "The Awakening of a Fourth Baltic State", The Wall Street Journal Europe, October 20, 1990.

62   The enterpreneurs constituting and playing the market - in both the West and the newly reborn democracies - increasingly find their indispensable freedom of economic action effectively and discouragingly reduced if not indeed voided by uncomprehending, suspicious, non-cooperative, obstructive and/or careless officials affecting their businesses.  This may be changed by deliberately encouraging officials to become themselves market players and thus develop a more business-friendly mind-set.

63    Following a "coup de génie", the French Telecom, over the last ten years, installed free of charge over 5 million Minitel.  These intelligent household sets replace both the ordinary telephone and the telephone book, provide prompt access to an ever-increasing number of services and constitute the core of a nation-wide tax-free round-the-clock flee-market for bartering, buying and selling all sorts of new and old goods and services. The simplicity of the Minitel's handling, its every-day usefulness, and its availability at no upfront
costs (only the communication time is billed like in the case of an ordinary telephone call) has allowed even elderly people to learn playingly to handle modern communication equipments and computers.  It has already produced a quantum jump for the French society and will enable it, second to none, to provide economic and cultural leadership in the dawning information age.

64    "Of state and industry", leader, June 8, 1991, p.15.

65    "Kaliningrad - Inside Russia's Western Enclave" (4/27/91);  Timothy Aeppel, "Restless Ethnic Germans in USSR Make Bonn Nervous", WSJ, 5/24/91;  L.Delattre, "Kaliningrad rêve de Hong Kong", Journal de Genève, 22 mai 1991.

66    Other note-worthy Statute provisions include:

     "The port of Memel shall be considered as a port of international concern.  The recommendations adopted by the Barcelona Conference concerning ports subject to an international regime shall be applied thereto, unless otherwise herein provided."  (art.2)
     "There shall be a Harbour Board, which shall consist of three members appointed for three years and eligible for reappointment, as follows:
     1°   one representing Lithuanian economic interests, to be appointed by the Lithuanian Government;
     2°   one representing the economic interests of the Memel Territory, to be appointed by the Directorate of the Territory;
     3°   one to be appointed by the Chairman of the Advisory and Technical Committee for Communications and Transit of the League of Nations.  This member shall not be a citizen of a Niemen riparian State.  He shall give special attention to international economic interests served by the port and particularly to those of the districts for which the port of Memel is the natural outlet."  (art.5)

68    Only an again truly independent Lithuania may be internationally recognized as the legitimate holder of all titles attributed to Lithuania under the 1924 Memel Convention. However, as such it would also be subject to the related legal consequences, eg. the decision handed down by the Permanent Court of International Justice in The Hague which, on August 8, 1932, ruled that "le Statut de Memel doit être tenu pour un arrangement de nature conventionelle, liant la Lithuanie" (CPJI, 1932, p.300).

69    As to this zone's security status, its called-for creaters might find fruitful inspirations in the time-tested Swiss neutrality formula, devised by the French-Genevese diplomat Charles Pictet-de-Rochemont and adopted at the Paris Congress on November 20, 1815, by the Representatives of Austria, France, Great Britain, Prussia, Russia, a.o. (CPJI, 1930, C, 17-1, II, p.1191):

     "The neutrality and inviolability of Switzerland and its independence of all foreign influences are in the true interets of the politics of Europe as a whole."

We, the Citizens of Europe,

Members of peoples and Citizens of any one or more communities, cantons, Länder, regions, provinces, republics and monarchies, which are the sovereign constituents of Europe (1),

upholding the right of every people to self-government, self-determination and pursuit of economic and social welfare through the free exercise of the sovereignty rights incumbent upon each viable independent nation, as the natural extention of every Citizen's rights to privacy, self-fulfilment and pursuit of happiness as each of us sees fit and being in line with our inalienable human rights and individual responsibilities,

aspiring to be properly represented and heard notably at the Council of Europe and in its Parliamentary Assembly, as well as in other European institutions capable of promoting our mutual understanding, respect and solidarity, and which enable us individually and commonly to prosper in peace and healthy cultural, economic and political competition,

Petition Our Leaders and Friends Everywhere

1     In Winston Churchill's "sense of enlarged patriotism and common citizenship [where] France and Germany must take the lead together [and] Great Britain, the British Commonwealth of Nations, mighty America, and I trust Soviet Russia - for then indeed all would be well - must be the friends and sponsors of the new Europe" (Zurich speech, Sept.19, 1946, in "Documents on the History of European Integration" III, Walter Lipgens, Wilfried Loth editors, Gruyter, Berlin, 1988, p.662). This reflects the Briand/Stresemann plan, worked out by the foreign ministers Aristide Briand (France) and Gustave Stresemann (Germany) in 1930 under the League of Nations auspices, covering some 28 European countries, including the Baltic states, the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia. A related symposium, organized by Prof.Antoine Fleury, will be held at the University of Geneva, September 19-21, 1991 (see also: Memorandum sur l'organisation d'un régime d'union fédérale européenne, L'Europe Nouvelle, 9/27/30, p.1377). The plan's principle features were:

GOGEL draft A - 8/13/91

"The Signatory States,

   Recognizing social and economic gradients between and within countries to constitute root causes for tensions and resulting conflicts, for which reason the methods and instruments of production, marketing and trade should take account and advantage of all opportunities for slowing down, arresting and, wherever feasible, even reversing the further growth of these gradients;
   Aware of the socio-economically adverse effects of production investments which orient themselves on, and indeed may feed the wasteful cycle of non-genuine short-term markets - rather than bringing to light, following and responding to the more basic trends of human aspirations;
   Noting the geometrically growing economic and social costs of essentially unlimited and disoriented growth;
   Recognizing the ecological and/or human and animal health hazards associated with some prevailing methods and instruments of production, marketing and consumption of many of our foods and goods as unwittingly diminishing the quality of life for both the individual and society as a whole;
   Aware of the rapidly growing demand particularly in industrialized countries for, inter alia, natural medicines, biological food and quite generally for such natural products for man's immediate surrounding which afford a warmer relationship to them;
   Appreciating the world-wide symbiosis thus afforded, and which should enable developing countries to benefit from these highly potential quality demands through concentration of their resources on the development and application of corresponding production methods and instruments reflecting their own cultural roots - while providing for the industrialized countries to benefit primarily in the field of public health and with a view to the quality of material life in general;
   Anticipating a more deliberately nature-, culture- and labour-intensive production of quality goods to entail the preservation and creation of professions, rather than mere jobs, and thus to provide among others
-  the indispensable basis for the production of ever more sophisticated goods,
-  the vehicle for socio-economic development focused on rural areas, and thereby
-  a potent incentive towards reversing the uprooting of rural populations and their excessive migration to urban centres particularly in developing areas;
   Considering equitable market access for, and unimpeded international trade of basic commodities, semi-finished and finished quality products, services and technologies of all degrees of sophistication to be of importance for both developing countries and their partners in the more industrialized parts of the world:

    Therefore declare their readiness to cooperate individually and jointly with suitable interested parties in the development and implementation of measures in line with the following guiding principles for international trade and commerce:

1. Developing countries' natural and other goods produced, consumable and disposable in conformity with ecological indications, shall have preferential and equitable access to the markets of industrialized countries, and they shall be exempted from protective tariffs and other commercial import restrictions commensurate to the extent that their quality equals or exceeds the highest quality of comparable goods produced in the importing industrialized country.

2. Any customer providing for adequate end-user responsibility shall have politically unimpeded access to whatever goods, technologies and services he may require and obtain, under normal commercial terms and conditions free of restrictive business practises.

______________

1   This text was developed at UNCTAD III, the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development held in Santiago de Chile in 1972, by the late Christoph Eckenstein, Vittorio de la Huerta and Anton Keller, in order to illustrate some ideas relating to trade between less and more advanced countries, rural migration, and market access guarantees relying exclusively on mutually beneficial quality standards.  Although ever officially adopted, it has served as a source of inspiration for works concerning the North-South debate.  But it may be equally helpful in matters concerning South-South trade and East European countries.

    After an unusually heated debate and under enormous establishment pressure to follow the European fashion of the year, Switzerland's sovereigns on Sunday rejected membership in the European Economic Area (EEA). They preferred their time-tested powers to shape the Swiss House by their own means as best they can.
    Mr. and Mrs. Schweizer did not see their country's future secured by a "level playing field" based on the lowest common denominator. They refused to submit to the bureaucratic laws and whims of the European Community, of which the EEA is to be but a satellite. Instead, they instructed their representatives to vigorously defend Swiss interests and achievements in the economic, social and political field through existing instruments and liberties.
    The coalition that favored a "yes" vote rightly stressed that Sunday's vote was not on whether to join the EC as a full member. That was only the officially avowed aim of this first and theoretically reversible step in that direction. The vote was "only" about accepting the "Eurolex," the 1,200 page package of laws and regulations for joining the EEA.
    In the wake of the Soviet Bloc's crumbling, the EEA was originally proposed by European Commission President Jacques Delors as a three-ring structure for accommodating the seven countries of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) and, to a lesser degree, some former members of Comecon, the now-defunct Soviet controlled trade bloc. The result can be summed up in the term "EC satellite zone," where in the case of Switzerland (with agriculture for a time excluded) some 80% of the EC's present and future rules and regulations would have been fully adopted. But it is important to note that this would have been without those who are living and taxed in that zone having any representation in the EC's decision making bodies.
    With such an un-Swiss deal, argued opponents of EEA membership led by industrialist and lawmaker Christoph Blocher, Switzerland would give up too much for too little. They saw hard-fought economic, social and political gains and even key advantages needlessly discarded. And this at the very moment when growing economic and political uncertainties argued urgently instead for deregulation and decriminalization of the market. It is also a time when there are growing doubts all over Europe about the EC's basic design, structures and outlook.
   With a 3%-and-growing Swiss unemployment rate and commonly shared concerns about the country's future capacity to compete in world markets, proponents of the EEA were willing to grudgingly accept the EC's legal dictates. They argued that Switzerland's future working and living conditions could be better influenced from inside the EC power structure than from outside.
    This, however, is not necessarily so, providing Switzerland understands its rights and interests and plays its cards competently. That was the answer of those who argued for a "no" vote and the one Swiss voters now have handed to their public servants.
    Switzerland already has an impressive and successful network of bilateral and multilateral agreements covering all its neighbors and most of its major trading partners overseas, including the U.S. and Canada. This network, which includes EC-EFTA agreements, is dense and comforting, covering in a general and mutually beneficial way almost all those freedoms that were being peddled as new achievements and breakthroughs. They only need to be taken from the shelf and applied more courageously, fully and loyally.
    Moreover, with regard to France, imaginative Swiss diplomats could draw on some other forgotten but valid treaties which take precedence over all EC rules and regulations, according to article 234 of the EC's fundamental Treaty of Rome. France's relative economic and political clout in the continuously evolving European landscape could indeed be strengthened significantly by way of a highly attractive customs-free, less regulated and less bureaucratized free zone which could be created in the heart of Europe. This zone would consist of northern Savoy, Geneva and, yes, even the whole of Switzerland. In this perspective more vision, more self-confidence and more guts on the part of Genevan and Swiss diplomats would aid Geneva's chances of becoming the natural center of a European confederation.
    Considering the growing British opposition to the EC's evolution in the direction of centralized power, and in the light of Denmark's negative and France's less-than-enthusiastic ratification of the ill-considered Maastricht treaty, the Swiss "no" to even the "limited and purely economic" EEA is a welcome support for many other Europeans. Being fully in line with the legitimate aspirations and interests of all European peoples for a more democratic, more open and less centralized European
architecture, this vote may have given voice to many who do not have the opportunity to express their views by means of a ballot. Those who have looked at the 200-year success story of the equally non-uniform U.S. market and at the visionary Briand-Stresemann Plan in Europe may find inspiration and encouragement from the Swiss "no" to the Europe of misguided and misguiding centralists.
In fact, this vote constitutes a resounding "yes" for a revitalized Europe of entrepreneur-citizens. With voluntarily dismantled cartels, various living and working standards second to none, and with Swiss farmers-turned-water guardians to safeguard Europe's most important water castle and drinking water reserves, Heidiland may not merely survive in our memories. It may again become an example of progress and prosperity through independence for other European peoples and decision makers who wish to draw lessons from Eastern Europe's devastating experiment with centralization.

Mr. Keller is secretary of the Swiss Investors Protection Association in Geneva.

J.A.KELLER
box 2580 - 1211 Geneva 2
t+f (private in France): 0033-450322842

3. Februar 1995

Sehr geehrter Herr Bundesrat,

Unter Berücksichtigung der einschlägigen völkerrechtlichen Verpflichtungen der Schweiz (inkl. Vertrag von Turin von 1815 betreffend ihre Transitleistungspflicht am Simplon), der finanziellen und der innen- und aussenpolitischen Aspekte, sowie gestützt auf die neuesten Erkenntnisse bezüglich voraussichtlicher Bedarf an Alpentransitkapazitäten (nach dem allfälligen Wegfall der z.T. absurdensubventionen-bedingten künstlichen Warentransporte quer durch Europe), erscheint eine neuerliche Prüfung der Transitachsenfrage, ebenso wie eine allfällige Volksabstimmung und Neuverhandlungen darüber angezeigt zu sein. Dabei anerbietet sich folgende Globallösung, welche abgestützt werden könnte auf eine denkbare österreichisch/schweizerischen Vereinbarung über die Wahrnehmung der besonderen Verantwortlichkeiten unserer beiden Alpenländer als den Trinkwasserschlössern Europas:

J.A.Keller

In a sign of how badly German-Polish relations have frayed in recent months, a long-shot lawsuit by an obscure German claims group has prompted Poland to call into question a treaty meant to settle forever the borders between the two countries.

The Polish foreign minister, Anna Fotyga, raised doubts about the treaty in a radio interview Tuesday, a week after a group representing Germans expelled from present-day Poland after World War II filed suit at the European Court of Human Rights, seeking restitution of their property.

Though Fotyga has since backed away from suggestions that the treaty be renegotiated, she said Poland would push for a "legal solution" that "will respect the truth and the historical responsibility." In a statement issued Thursday, she condemned the German claims as "an attempt at reversing moral responsibility for the effects of World War II, which began with the German attack on Poland and caused irreparable losses and sufferings to the Polish state and nation."

Germans and Poles have squabbled over a lot of things in the last year, not least a new gas pipeline that Germany and Russia are building under the Baltic Sea, bypassing Poland. But the dispute this week was a reminder of how much of the ill will is still about their tragic shared history.

Germany brushed aside the need to renegotiate the treaty, signed 16 years ago by Berlin and Warsaw after the fall of Communism. It confirms the post- World War II borders between the countries and forecloses any claims by the German state on territory lost to Poland after the war.

The trouble is, the treaty does not deal with claims made by individuals. These new claims have reopened old wounds in Poland, where some people accuse Germans of trying to create a moral equivalence between the suffering of Germans and the suffering they inflicted on others.

The German government said it did not support the claims of the group, known as the Prussian Trust, but it also does plan to impede it, since displaced Germans are an influential constituency here.

After the end of the World War II, more than 12 million Germans were expelled from territories that are now part of Poland and other East European countries. The Federation of Expellees, the main lobbying group for these people, has kept this issue alive in Germany, sponsoring an exhibition in Berlin last summer that also provoked outrage in Poland.

But even the federation has kept its distance from the Prussian Trust, which has filed 22 claims with the Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. Critics here said the group — which is small and consists largely of people who were expelled from the former Silesia — had reactionary tendencies.

Rudi Pawelka, a retired policeman who is the director of the Prussian Trust, said its goal was both symbolic and concrete.

"We want the injustice of our expulsion to be recognized and for there to be compensation," he said. "And there the question of property ownership becomes relevant."

Pawelka said the Prussian Trust chose to file claims with the Court of Human Rights because other displaced peoples had successfully pressed their cases there. Poland, as a member of the European Union, would also be subject to any decision handed down by the court, he said.

German officials said the lawsuit was hopeless and would only antagonize Polish officials — a point that seemed indisputable, given the statements by the foreign minister and the twin brothers who govern Poland, President Lech Kaczynski and Prime Minister Jaroslaw Kaczynski.

The government of Chancellor Angela Merkel has tried to support Poland in other ways, including in its running conflict with Russia over Moscow's ban of Polish meat products. That ban has led Poland to hold up a broader partnership agreement between Russia and Europe.

Some experts on German-Polish relations said the vitriol of Poland's leaders masked a generally healthy relationship on other levels. Trade between Germany and Poland is busy and there are many exchanges between academics, students and legislative officials.

"In the long run, despite all these dramatic statements, I am quite optimistic," said Gesine Schwan, a Polish expert who is the president of Viadrina European University in Frankfurt an der Oder. Still, she said, "This government in Poland must be careful about its relationship with its neighbors."

Comment     6/14/2008   8:06:49 AM

Instead of showing the yellow card to the Irish - and previously to the French and the Dutch - voters, Ireland should be applauded for its role to stop an ill-designed and ill-fated wildcat train in its track. This has now again opened the way for bringing about the European Confederation which, in the wake of the fall of the Berlin Wall, was called for by Presidents François Mitterrand and Vaclav Havel (www.solami.com/a21.htm). Indeed, those concerned with the future of Europe, its civilization achievements and the looming IVth Reich designs for the Old Continent, the Near East, and Russia have every reason to disregard the epidermic reactions from some interested frustrated Eurocrats and their allies on both sides of the Atlantic. Give Europe back to its Citizens! That's what more principled, visionary and courageous British, Dutch, French, German, Irish, Italian, Swiss, Turkish and other lawmakers are calling for (.../a21.htm, .../turkey.htm).
Iconoclast - swissbit@solami.com

Like a fish, Europe is rotting from the head
By Wolfgang Münchau

Helmut Schmidt, the former German chancellor, last month made an astute observation: “The European Central Bank is the only institution in Europe that works well.”

It is a remarkable statement in several ways. It implies of course that the other European institutions are not working well. I am afraid this is true. I have on previous occasions criticised the unco-ordinated policy response of Europe’s political leaders. Their anti-crisis strategy is to hope the US and China deliver sufficient growth to pull Europe out of recession. That will probably not happen this time.

But there is another, less frequently discussed dimension to Europe’s mistaken policy response. The European Commission, the executive arm of the European Union whose job is to implement the region’s law and to drive its policy agenda, has failed abysmally in this crisis. The Commission was largely absent during the worst months of last year, and its subsequent responses fell consistently below what one would expect.

Of course, the Commission is not a government. It has only a small budget, no powers to raise taxes or issue bonds, and it operates under strict guidelines. But as various dimensions of economic policy are now integrated across Europe, one would expect the Commission to play a leading role as a co-ordinator and as a source of new ideas to fight the crisis.

The problem with the Commission is not its civil servants. In the absence of political leadership, they apply the rules as they are, for example when they recommend brutal and politically suicidal wage cuts in Latvia, when they apply accession criteria to the eurozone with no flexibility, or when they produce ineffective financial regulation. These are not causes of the problem but mere symptoms of a lack of political direction.

There is a saying that the fish rots from the head, and this is exactly what has been happening here. There is nothing in European politics that stinks more than the apparent inevitability of another five-year term for José Manuel Barroso, the Portuguese president of the Commission. He spent most of the last few years on his bid for re-election rather than doing his job. If the centre-right wins the elections to the European parliament, as everybody seems to expect, nothing can stop Mr Barroso’s bandwagon.

This state of affairs sends out a disastrous message – that job performance is irrelevant and that Europe has already reverted to business as usual. Mr Barroso is a conservative from a small country, who followed a socialist from a large country. Europe’s top jobs are not awarded on the basis of electoral success, but on whether you fit into an opaque political matrix.

In the case of a Commission president who has already served for five years, one would expect that he should at the very least be able to answer the questions: What exactly did you achieve during your first term? And what is your big idea for the second?

In my view, Mr Barroso is among the weakest Commission presidents ever, a vain man who lacks political courage. He and his supporters will tell us that his big achievement is his dogged pursuit of the Lisbon agenda, a programme to boost Europe’s international competitiveness. Another supporter of Mr Barroso told me that his biggest legacy was the decision to set up the De Larosière committee, named after a former central banker whose group produced a moderately ambitious report to reform Europe’s system of banking supervision. Okay, let us give him some credit for that.

I suspect his big idea for the next five years is to relaunch the Lisbon agenda, and waste another five or 10 years on voodoo economics, and diverting attention from real and urgent policy issues, such as a more coherent system of economic crisis management.

Everybody in Brussels is saying that Mr Barroso’s reappointment is almost a done deal. I suspect they are right. Ms Merkel apparently finds him a congenial and pliable Commission president, and the Socialists are too incompetent to field their own candidate. Gordon Brown, the British prime minister, is also supportive. Nicolas Sarkozy is not a fan but then the French president is not a supporter of a strong and self-confident European Commission either, so Mr Barroso might suit him well for that reason. Silvio Berlusconi, the Italian prime minister, has other problems at the moment.

There are still a few potential obstacles to Mr Barroso’s re-election. The European elections might not go as well for the Christian Democrats as they hoped, and the centre-right might end up too fragmented. It is possible that the outcome of the second Irish referendum on the Lisbon treaty will have a bearing on the decision, which is why Mr Barroso wants EU heads of government to decide on his reappointment at their meeting next month, rather than in October, as Mr Sarkozy recently proposed.

So it is not quite game, set and match yet but it is as close as it could get at this stage. This is all very depressing. Mr Schmidt is right about the ECB. Indeed the central bank made a number of good decisions last week, when it delivered a robust policy response to the crisis.

But I never thought that we would ever celebrate a central bank as the only political institution that really works in Europe. How did we get there?

munchau@eurointelligence.com