Brexit has left behind a sharply divided country. As there was no powerful force in the UK to fight courageously against Brexit, the result was quite tight.
53% of voters voted for parties that are against Brexit. But because of the British electoral system, that did not turn into mandates. While Johnson gained an overwhelming majority of 43% in Parliament, the smaller parties are getting lost in the electoral system.

It is a good sign for the unity of Europe that the Commission of Ursula von der Leyen obtained a 65-percent majority in the European Parliament. The Commission gained a broader majority in the confidence vote than any national government. That is an extremely positive sign and it should be noted. The anti-Europeans have not gown any stronger in Parliament in the last year and are even dwindling with the departure of the British.

The EU must have the right policies; it must work on winning people over and explain why what we need in today’s globalised world for the purposes of economic, trade and security policy cannot be achieved by a nation state alone. Every nation state – including Germany – is a dwarf by comparison. The challenges in the areas of internal and external security, trade policy, digitisation, climate protection, China and the US can only be solved together.

As the largest trading power in the world, the EU must continue its successful trade policy, quickly ratify its agreements with Vietnam and the states of Mercosur (Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay), conclude agreements with Australia and New Zealand in the coming months and achieve faster progress with other countries. This is necessary to rescue rules-based multilateralism in view of the behaviour of China and the US and for geo-strategic reasons.

We must protect the grass roots so that populism does not spread like a cancer. We must not surrender ground to the populists and nationalists without a fight. Tell the truth about Europe and do not allow lies to gain the upper hand. The public and, of course, many media also play a role in this. In the UK, the newspapers of Rupert Murdoch, an Australian with an American passport, determine European policy. We can do nothing about that. But we can ensure that Europe’s achievements are more in the foreground.

Today, the Poles have a gross domestic product that is six times higher than 25 years ago. We therefore need an annual cost-benefit analysis of German membership in the European Union, which the Federal Government should present to the German parliament every year. Every country should draw up a cost-benefit analysis of this sort. Because at the moment: when it’s raining, it’s Brussels, and when the sun is shining, it’s Paris, London or Berlin.

Not everything that comes out of Brussels is bad. Of course, mistakes have been made, and more will follow. But to describe Europe as a failed project is rubbish. It is not perfect, but it has been on the right path with many, many positive effects over recent years.

I share the concerns about Huawei. But this is precisely the sort of situation that could and should be an opportunity for Europe. By the EU taking hold of everyone’s money and developing an alternative power. Becoming strong in itself is a key European question. We need strong European companies, European champions. As a matter of principle, there must, of course, be competition in the European Union. The politics of competition is the basic law of the market economy. But there are individual industries in which the creation of competition must be defined not in European but in global terms.

As far as the UK is concerned: nothing much will change before the end of the year. By then, a trade agreement must be negotiated which does not put the integrity of the internal market at risk. There may not be enough time to avoid tariffs. But if the UK wants to lower its standards, it may be difficult to make much progress on non-tariff trade barriers. The transition period would have to be extended by two more years for that, as provided for in the exit agreement. But so far, Johnson has rejected this. The intention is also to conclude agreements on external and internal security, research and the Erasmus programme.

In conclusion: we must not shut ourselves off from the UK. And I am hopeful that, once they have bumped along for a decade or so, the British will find their way back into the EU.

Elmar Brok is a German politician who served as Member of the European Parliament (MEP) from 1980 until 2019, who is best known for his role as chairman of the European Parliament Committee on Foreign Affairs. He is a member of the CDU and held many leadership positions in German and European politics. As a member of the Convention on the Constitution for Europe and in the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, Brok is widely credited with contributing crucially to the Constitution of the EU. He is also former President of the Union of European Federalists (UEF).

I’ve been an avowed European for decades. Emotionally as well as rationally. I wouldn’t want to go back to a Europe that no longer has the freedoms and freedom of movement afforded by open borders, a common currency, and shared values and convictions. Then there are the many economic advantages such as free trade and lower transaction costs. Advantages from which everyone in the European Union benefits.

Brexit, a tragedy in so many ways, now seems inevitable. And it makes one thing abundantly clear: a united Europe can’t be taken for granted. It needs people who don’t look on in silence when, in many countries, the criticism of Europe grows louder on the political fringe. It needs people who act in the interests of Europe when Europe’s strengths are in danger.

A glance at Eastern Europe in particular demonstrates what Europe can do for people. The EU’s two waves of eastern expansion in 2004 and 2007 placed Central and Eastern European countries where they’d always been and where they belong: at the heart of Europe.

Since the collapse of the Iron Curtain, countries in Central and Eastern Europe have written an unparalleled success story. A story that has improved people’s lives there, and enriched Europe as a whole. Economic growth in Eastern Europe is consistently stronger than in the West and, increasingly, is benefiting ordinary citizens. Although wages are lower than in the West, the gap has narrowed considerably. Unemployment rates in Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Poland are currently among Europe’s lowest. Central and Eastern European countries have achieved great things, and I have the highest respect for them.

At E.ON, we’re very proud to be part of this success story. Our operations in Hungary, Romania, Slovakia, and the Czech Republic date back several decades. Since 1990, we’ve made substantial investments in Hungary’s power and gas sectors, as has innogy, which is now part of the E.ON Group. In doing so, we’ve made a significant contribution to the economic upturn in the region. Moreover, we feel just as at home in these countries as we do in Germany or Sweden.

Central and Eastern European countries are superbly positioned to continue writing their success story and to play an even more prominent role in Europe and the world. They have extremely talented people and outstanding technologies. But, above all, they have a proven willingness to change and are thus ideally prepared for the transformation phase in which we currently find ourselves: the 21st century is the first century in which the primary fuel will be electricity. Everything that can be electrified will be electrified. And everything that can be digitalized will be digitalized.

What will make all that possible? As usual, technology. Technology has always unlocked new worlds, propelled progress, and improved people’s lives. And that’s what will happen again here. Our entire world will be interconnected and electrified. Energy sources and energy consumption will change. Transport too will gradually convert to electricity. Electrical, digital, interconnected environments will emerge everywhere.

In times like these, anyone who wants not only to survive but also to set the tone must be accustomed to change. That’s precisely why I’m convinced that the people of Central and Eastern Europe can serve as an example to all of us. My many visits to these countries have shown me repeatedly that their people have learned how to embrace change. Over the past 30 years, change has been omnipresent in this core region of Europe and has improved many people’s lives. In western Europe, change is often accompanied by anxiety, caution, and reluctance. History shapes us, in both the East and West. And I believe that history has made countries such as Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Slovakia more aware of the advantages of change: they embrace new things and adapt to new circumstances faster. Consequently, I also believe that these countries in particular have a great opportunity to become pacesetters in digitalization, an opportunity that they should seize with confidence.

E.ON has to embrace change as well. After all, we’re at a key turning point in our company’s history. The innogy takeover equips us for an energy world already undergoing profound change. The energy market is reinventing itself. It’s becoming greener, more decentralized, and more digital. At E.ON, we’ve not only adapted to this change. Together with our customers in 14 European countries and Turkey, we’ve played a decisive role in shaping it. The integration of innogy will ideally position us to continue this leadership role, especially in Central and Eastern European countries.

We’re going to make our energy networks and solutions smarter, enabling households, businesses, communities, and entire cities to be more efficient. We’re also going to help them to reduce their carbon emissions. Energy networks will become the Internet of energy, connecting people and thus continually opening up new horizons. Our energy networks are the platform for a myriad of ideas and solutions, for our customers and our commercial partners. As green and agile as possible. That’s our guiding principle.

Looking ahead, the energy industry is facing three main challenges:
First, the digital age’s appetite for energy will become increasingly voracious. Digitalization comes at a cost. If the Internet were a country, it would have the sixth largest energy consumption of all nations in the world. And this trend will just continue. Therefore, we’re going to need more green electricity.

Second, the digital age’s main prerequisite is reliable electricity supply. For example, a company whose entire production process is digitally controlled requires precision. Yet the output of green energy fluctuates considerably and is thus anything but reliable. The challenges this creates will be tackled by digital solutions. Digital control systems will make it possible to connect customers’ electronic devices—those that consume electricity, as well as those that store it—to balance out fluctuations and ensure reliable energy supply. And it goes without saying here that customer data needs to be protected at all times.

Third, the complexity of the new energy world can’t be managed by power lines and transformer stations alone. Distribution networks must become more intelligent and responsive. They must become smart grids. When there’s not enough electricity available, smart-grid technology can coordinate the output of numerous small, distributed generating units and deliver it to the grid like the output of a big power station. When there’s too much electricity, smart-home technology can use that surplus to charge electric vehicles or power water heaters. Going forward, network control centers will be able to use this flexibility more and more effectively to utilize as much green energy as possible. Distribution networks are becoming digitalized, automated, and self-learning. Ultimately, this will create an Internet of energy.

We can only overcome the challenges of the digital, electrified world by working together. It will require the collaboration of countries, research institutions, industry, and policymakers. I encourage everyone to be as open-minded as possible toward new technologies. And to be more willing to take risks. After all, every valuable change is accompanied by risk. I also advocate a policy and regulatory environment that fosters change, that doesn’t try to micro-manage, and that creates incentives for investments in intelligent technology.

If the European Union wants to hold its own against other economic regions, it needs to harness and interconnect the capabilities of every member state. If we want to be successful and effective, we need to concentrate on our strengths rather than our weaknesses. Europe’s diversity is a source of immense potential. But we need to have the confidence to utilize it. Together, for a strong and self-assured Europe.

The text appeared in the “Budapester Zeitung” on 13th December, you can find the original version as a PDF in German here.

Inspired by the article series “Europe can do better”, published by United Europe and German newspaper “Handelsblatt”, the Dutch newspaper “Het financial Dagblad” has published views of eight Dutch CEOs and their visions for a joint and competitive EU. Please find following the article of Frans van Houten, CEO von Royal Philips:

For the past 35 years, I have lived in six different countries, including Germany, the United States and Singapore, but for me the Netherlands is one of the most attractive places to live and work. It is beautiful and safe here, there is good education and good health care. This is shared by many Dutch people. According to the Central Bureau of Statistics, almost 9 out of 10 Dutch people say they are happy.

But although the Dutch are satisfied with their own lives, there is also a feeling of dissatisfaction with society. The aftermath of the crisis is still undermining confidence. The ongoing digitalisation and automation are feeding the fear of job insecurity and stagnating incomes, and environmental concerns are also increasing. In addition, the benefits of the European Union and globalisation are being called into question more than in recent decades.

It is perhaps a reflex to retreat behind the dikes, or to be ‘against’. But that will not work at all. In order to be able to finance a vital society in the Netherlands, to maintain welfare and prosperity, and to be able to help people who are struggling, sustainable economic growth of more than 2% per year is necessary. We can only achieve this if we take initiatives.

“The European Union is certainly not perfect. The bureaucracy must be reduced and the clout increased”. As a small country in Europe, we are dependent on foreign countries. For example, Dutch exports account for no less than 32% of gross domestic product, and international trade is a crucial source of jobs. Because of their international activities, multinationals account for two-thirds of the turnover of Dutch businesses and, crucial for economic growth, for more than half of the added value.

Philips is also heavily dependent on foreign countries. Although only 3% of our global turnover of €18 billion is generated in the Netherlands, we have many activities here. Thanks to exports and the favourable business climate, it pays to spend €700 million a year on R&D in the Netherlands.

So we have to earn our living mainly across national borders. That is why the Netherlands must continue to distinguish itself worldwide in terms of knowledge, creativity, entrepreneurial power and productivity. Fortunately, we are good at that. In 2018, the World Economic Forum published a ranking of the competitiveness of 140 countries. The small Netherlands is in sixth place on this list.

In order to keep this competitive strength of the Netherlands strong, we must continue to invest in talent and entrepreneurship. In order to do so, we need Europe. After the US, the European Union is the largest economic area in the world, with freedom of movement of people, goods, services and capital.

For the Netherlands as a knowledge economy, it is important that the knowledge we generate here is put to work so that it contributes to economic growth. A proven fertile environment for knowledge valorisation is an innovation campus, of which the Netherlands has 17. The largest is the High Tech Campus in Eindhoven, founded by Philips, which is attended by new companies and start-ups every year. However, this rapid growth needs to be fed by highly educated employees from colleges and universities in the Netherlands and abroad.

Now I would like to say that the European Union is certainly not perfect. The bureaucracy should be reduced, and the power to act should be increased. Together, the Member States could do more to improve its competitive position in relation to the US and China, for example in the field of artificial intelligence. Improving Europe in terms of employment, climate and social cohesion will only be possible if we make positive and constructive efforts. We must not, therefore, be seduced by the recruitment campaigns of some politicians who pretend to be able to withdraw behind the dikes. I am an optimist. I firmly believe that, as the strong Netherlands, we can seize opportunities in a united Europe. Let us do this together.

Inspired by the article series “Europe can do better”, published by United Europe and German newspaper “Handelsblatt”, the Dutch newspaper “Het financial Dagblad” has published views of eight Dutch CEOs and their visions for a joint and competitive EU. Please find following the article of Hein Schumacher, CEO of FrieslandCampina:

How do we move from a European neighborhood to European society? It may feel comfortable, but it is not sustainable. After all, the future calls for common ground on issues that are truly cross-border in nature.

To this end, I draw inspiration from business models that go beyond ‘shareholder value alone’ and therefore fit in well with Europe. Such a model is also FrieslandCampina, an international dairy company owned by a cooperative of over 18,000 dairy farmers.

When nine farmers set up a cheese factory together in 1871, they knew: ‘only I can make ends meet, but together we can make progress’. The cooperative as a form of cooperation is focused on the long term. Much has changed since that first cooperation almost 150 years ago. As a cooperative, we want to lead with sustainability, towards more nature on the land, more outdoor grazing, more energy from sun, wind and manure, to more special and other milk. I am in favor of CO2 emissions but at the level of the real market’.

In the short term, these ‘requirements’ can be sanded on an individual level. But it is precisely in this cooperative experience that diversity is a prerequisite for success for the collective in the longer term. This requires trust in each other and leadership. It is in this spirit that we must also solve the collective EU challenges together, not in each individual Member State. Think of themes such as world trade, sustainability, biodiversity and migration. It will be difficult for the Member States in the short term to surrender sovereignty on these issues, but it is a huge opportunity in the long term.

Sustainability is such an opportunity for Europe. I am in favour of pricing CO2 emissions. It is an effective incentive to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but at the level of the real market, globally or at least at the European level. It is not really an option for each Member State, because then part of the production – including the associated greenhouse gas emissions – moves from one Member State to another.

We also need to move away from the national ‘plastics approach’: from collection to processing to reuse. Plastic is a global problem, and so we need to put a great deal of energy into collaborations such as the Plastic Pact and Plastic Summit. We must put an end to the national plastic patchwork blankets and quickly come up with a European pact.

Making the production processes in agriculture more sustainable also requires a supranational approach. The question is how common the new European Common Agricultural Policy really is. We need to move towards a European level playing field when it comes to subsidies and towards a policy that makes the agricultural sector and products primarily sustainable. In this respect, consider the sustainability aspects as a direct condition for subsidies.

It is also about good nutrition for the world. This does not require more production, but better distribution and affordability. In Africa, the population will double in the next 30 years. Current food production will not be able to feed that growing population. If we want to reduce migration from Africa, Europe will have to make a contribution to the increasing demand for food in Africa.

By reducing waste, which in some EU countries is close to 30%. But also by producing more efficiently and sustainably for export. This food improvement cannot come from one company or one country. This calls for a larger, common approach and must be the spearhead of European foreign policy.

The cooperative model of solidarity and reciprocity is deeply rooted in Europe. Not side by side, but together. That sounds good, but living together sometimes demands that it be scourged for the individual or the individual Member State. In the long term, this will benefit us all and requires courage and leadership.

Inspired by the article series “Europe can do better”, published by United Europe and German newspaper “Handelsblatt”, the Dutch newspaper “Het financial Dagblad” has published views of eight Dutch CEOs and their visions for a joint and competitive EU. Please find following the article of Feike Sijbesma, CEO of Royal DSM:

On 23 May the Netherlands were able to vote again. For many in the world this is a – almost unthinkable – privilege. This time we are even allowed to vote for a broader context than just the Netherlands: the European elections. Who would have thought that 75 years ago?

We can be proud and grateful for what we have built up together in the Netherlands since the end of the Second World War. A prosperous country, with innovative entrepreneurship that provides jobs for many. As a small (trade) country, the Netherlands has benefited from globalisation. By tackling major challenges together, such as the flood defences in the 1960s or the transition from coal to gas in the 1970s, by ‘poldering’ together, and by investing in new technologies, the Netherlands is now at the top of many lists. The Netherlands is the global number two in the field of innovation, we are one of the least corrupt countries and Dutch children are among the happiest in the world.

But what has been built up should never be taken for granted. And although globalisation has brought us prosperity, we must also note that certainly in the past 25 years, the (lower) middle incomes in the Netherlands have barely improved. Part of our society – in the Netherlands, in Europe and in the world – has benefited little or hardly from economic growth. The emerging economies, such as China and India, will also claim their share of the world experience. As the Netherlands Institute for Social Research (Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau) describes, feelings of inequality and insecurity are on the increase among Dutch citizens. A feeling that there is hardly any influence on important decisions that concern us. And there are concerns about jobs and income, the climate – but also its costs – and therefore about our connection and the future, also of our children. Leadership is also responding to this.

EU enlargement is only possible if there is a good basis for fruitful cooperation.

However, the answer to these concerns is not to close ourselves off from globalisation, close our borders and withdraw behind the dikes. Better to build on the good that prosperity has brought us as a small country: working together – in confidence – with an open economy. Being confident does not mean being naive. The European Union has done us much good as a country, but we must ensure that the EU is not overshadowed by a complex bureaucratic structure and that it does not take decisions that we can regulate better at the national or regional level. The rapid growth in the number of EU Member States has gone too fast for some and may have brought too few visible benefits. Further enlargement is only possible if there is a good basis for fruitful cooperation, not only in the economic sphere but also in the political and social spheres. Shared norms and values are of great importance here.

Not everyone realises that Europe is the world’s largest economy, in which others are keen to invest. We can benefit from this. Our economy offers unprecedented opportunities for innovation, education, infrastructure and labour market opportunities. Compared to other continents, business in Europe is also much more advanced in terms of sustainability. More and more companies are realising that a company’s task is more than just making money. Doing well financially goes hand in hand with doing good for the world and our society. Here, too, there are opportunities.

It is essential that the EU forms a strong unity with respect to the other ‘great’ powers. This can only be achieved by making a common voice heard. In doing so, we must make use of the differences, the diversity, in Europe. For example, by combining – perhaps clichés – German engineering, Italian art and design and Dutch commercial spirit. Because that way we can learn from each other and move forward.

In addition to the economy, this progress is also about climate, achieving the Paris objectives with a European prize for CO2 as an incentive, a sustainable food system, biodiversity, the energy transition, a circular economy, innovation, education and common refugee policy. Continued prosperity requires a collaborative Europe in which we respond to the problems with courage and innovation. Where we take everyone with us and everyone can benefit from our strengths. Using the benefits of globalisation, but much more inclusive than hitherto, a Netherlands and Europe for and with all, focused on prosperity and well-being for future generations as well.

Inspired by the article series “Europe can do better”, published by United Europe and German newspaper “Handelsblatt”, the Dutch newspaper “Het financial Dagblad” has published views of eight Dutch CEOs and their visions for a joint and competitive EU. Please find following the article of Lard Friese, CEO of NN Group:

European cooperation started in the 1950s to achieve stability after a long period of wars between neighboring countries. European integration through economic and political cooperation, with the aim of achieving peace. It is a good thing that we continue to debate the pros and cons, what can be arranged nationally and what can be arranged together, the modernisation of the association and the improvement of the governance model and effectiveness. But let us not lose sight of the fact that our generation benefits from the stability, security and prosperity that this unique, multilateral cooperation has brought. Certainly now, at a time when the world is facing major geopolitical issues relating to trade, security, migration and climate.

Life expectancy
The European Union plays an important role in challenges that are the same for every country, despite the many cultural differences. These are major issues for present and future generations that do not recognise national borders, such as – close to my own daily practice – the ageing of the population. It does not matter which country you come from or which political affiliation you have, the demographic reality that we are getting older applies to all the countries in the Union. And this has consequences. Since the 1950s, people’s life expectancy has increased, and in future, there will be more elderly people than young people. Today, in the EU, approximately one-fifth of the population is over 65, and in 20 years’ time it will be almost one third. There seems to be relatively little attention paid to this issue in the European political debate. European countries are preparing for this demographic reality in different ways, but the starting position is different everywhere. Many Eastern European countries are still in the early stages of building up a sustainable pension system. In some large European countries, there is mainly a public pension for which the question is how sustainable its financing is. In other countries – such as the Netherlands – considerable savings have been made for old age. But even in our country, we cannot avoid the need to adapt the system to today’s society, which, in my view, should lead to a more personal pension.

Responsibility
No matter how the system is set up per country, the demographic clock is ticking. In addition, in many countries governments are partly withdrawing from their caring role and people are increasingly becoming responsible for their own pensions. Saving is less attractive due to the low interest rate and at the same time, financial institutions can offer fewer guarantees (in an affordable manner), partly due to regulations. As a result, risks are increasingly shifting to people themselves. This means that, more than in the past, households in Europe have to make their own choices and take responsibility for their (long-term) financial planning, for the organisation of their pensions and for the way in which they build up assets in an environment of very low-interest rates. And yet we know that most people have only a limited interest in financial issues. As a sector itself, we will have to work hard, together with governments, to increase consumers’ knowledge and awareness. And we need to help people make informed financial choices. The organisation of pension systems is mainly a national matter. However, it is a good thing that the EU is constantly mindful of the importance of responsible pension accrual. We can also work together much more on issues such as awareness and education. We must keep the regulations on the communication of financial products effective, simple and comprehensible. As far as I am concerned, financial education should be an integral part of the education curriculum, everywhere. So that together we can pass on to future generations the stability and prosperity that Europe has brought us.

Inspired by the article series “Europe can do better”, published by United Europe and German newspaper “Handelsblatt” from April to May 2019, the Dutch newspaper “Het financial Dagblad” has published views of eight Dutch CEOs and their visions for a joint and competitive EU. Please find following the article of Karl Guha, CEO of Van Lanschot Kempen:

The European idea matters because everything that underpins it has brought us stability and prosperity. It has resurrected an exhausted continent from the ashes of two world wars in order to guarantee peace and freedom.

Like many of my generation, I grew up in the shadow of these wars, which deeply affected several generations of my family. At its origins they were European wars, in which the whole world eventually became involved. We in Europe therefore have an obligation to the whole of humanity.

In my youth, the war was anything but an abstract concept. It manifested itself daily in countless forms, of which ‘eat your plate empty’ and ‘be thankful for what you have’ are just a few examples. The shadows of the war were always there. I was therefore aware of the sacrifices that people had made, which allowed me to grow up in peace. But every day I live, that awareness fades a little, and with it the belief that we have to fight for what we believe in. Forgetting this is, in my opinion, a sin.

The idea behind Europe stands for many things that I consider fundamental: the rule of law, democracy, the right to express oneself, the right to live in peace and harmony, the separation of church and state, religious freedom and other acquired freedoms in our society, solidarity towards the less fortunate and free trade.

But these freedoms are under pressure. The threat comes from all sides, from the extreme left to the extreme right, from old allies such as the United States to old enemies in Russia, the Middle East and China. They all pose a threat in their own specific way. But the European idea is strong and cannot be destroyed unless we ourselves allow it. The greatest danger, therefore, comes from within, with complacency perhaps the greatest enemy of all.

The nation-state – a Prussian concept – is important, but it must not lead to the demise of Europe. We don’t want to hear it, let alone accept it, but the truth is that as humans we are still (too) often engaged in tribal warfare. We must not let this tribal instinct take over. There is a great danger in seeing ‘others’ as suspicious and dangerous. Europe consists of multiple and diverse cultures. That is our strength. Unity in diversity, one might say. The threats we face, from climate to cybercrime, are better dealt with by a united Europe than by individual nation states trying to do something about it. If Europe we know today goes down, we will be nothing more than little pawns in the international game of superpowers.

As a company almost 300 years old, the history of Van Lanschot Kempen is deeply interwoven with that of the Low Countries and of Europe. In our history we have dedicated ourselves to prosperity and prosperity for our customers and for society as a whole. It is our firm conviction that without wealth there would be no taxation, and without taxation and a fair distribution of it, there would be no stable society. Stable societies based on the rule of law ensure democracy, prosperity and peace. That is precisely why we believe in the European idea.

Europe needs reforms, not destruction. However, before we take a hasty next step, it is important to consolidate and improve first. It is up to all of us to act now – to think with our conscience, with a clear and raised head, and to fight for the dreams of our ancestors. Bad things happen when the silent majority is silent. We must make our voice heard and vote for the people who best represent our hopes and dreams for our children, so that they too can live in peace and prosperity.

Inspired by the article series “Europe can do better”, published by United Europe and German newspaper “Handelsblatt” from April to May 2019, the Dutch newspaper “Het financial Dagblad” has published views of eight Dutch CEOs and their visions for a joint and competitive EU. Please find following the article of Eelco Hoekstra, CEO of Royal Vopak:

For the Netherlands, the European Union is a natural project that builds on the age-old realisation that we are stronger by working together and are better off with an open economy. A company such as Royal Vopak is a good illustration of this. Our roots lie in the port of Amsterdam, where around 1616 a group of dockworkers joined forces in the Blauwhoedenveem to unload ships and carry goods from all over the world to the merchants’ warehouses.

Over the past 400 years, the world and our company have changed dramatically, but we still exist by the grace of open markets and cooperation across borders. As a tank storage company, we facilitate international trade flows of products that are vital to our daily lives. These are chemical products, oil products, gases, edible oils and biofuels, possibly including hydrogen in the future.

Thanks to open markets, consumers and businesses can be confident that products will be available on time and at the lowest cost. It provides us in the Netherlands and people elsewhere in the world with jobs and economic growth.

The European Union is therefore of inestimable value to businesses, Dutch workers and society. As a champion of open markets, fewer trade barriers and a level playing field for large and small companies in the world, Europe has brought prosperity and competitiveness and thus a stronger position in the world, stability and peace. In addition, climate change, the energy transition, clean air, cybersecurity, immigration and food for a growing world population are not national but international challenges. We can only deal with them effectively through international cooperation. Here too, the European Union, whose course the European Parliament is partly responsible for determining, is of vital importance.

The European Union stands for openness and dialogue, security and justice. These are not self-evident. Only by working closely together can European countries compete in the world market, combat protectionism and guarantee our prosperity, welfare and security.

That is why we should not weaken but strengthen European cooperation. By cherishing the achievements and working on improvements where necessary, we are doing ourselves and our children a great service. I hope that we will all continue to trust that cooperation across borders will ultimately bring us the most. Over the centuries, we have learned that this is the best option.

I see myself as a European citizen. That was my cradle in Belgium. Immediately after my studies, I started working for Heineken in the Netherlands. In order to really get to know your own environment, it makes sense to be in a completely different environment from time to time. Having lived and worked in Africa for a large part of my life and now being able to represent Heineken worldwide, I have come to appreciate more than ever what we have all built up in Europe. Also, the way we do business in Europe.

It’s about more than just performance for the shareholder. We also invest in each other and in the future.

This integrative approach is also necessary to address future challenges in the areas of climate, trade, geopolitics, scarcity of resources, but also socio-economic developments such as digitization, demographic change, health and the increasing focus on the individual. These questions are everywhere, but the answers that world leaders are currently giving you are putting pressure on the way we live and do business. We now have a choice: will we take the lead in the European Union by giving constructive answers, or will we follow the agenda of others? Some politicians want us to believe that we have to hide behind the dikes.

This is precisely where the newly elected European Commission and a new European Parliament have an important role to play. Together with other representatives of European companies, I have recently called for this. More than 50 board members of major European companies organised in the European Round Table of Industrialists (ERT) are committed to a stronger, open and competitive Europe.

After all, a strong and united Europe can meet these challenges for us. Whether it is the entrepreneur, the worker or the citizen, the EU is good for us.

Some politicians want us to believe that we have to hide behind the dikes with a few old guilders in our hands. But more nationalism is always a worse answer than more cooperation and a stronger Europe. That is why, together with my ERT colleagues, I call for a strong European agenda in which I consider three important principles to be central:

First, let us be good for people and invest in citizens. A strong European economy is directly linked to strong social development and well-being. Our schools and universities must prepare our children today for the skills of the day after tomorrow. Our policies must be based on dialogue, and our company must make a sustainable contribution to socio-economic development.

Let us be good for our environment by investing in it. In this way, we have no time to lose in terms of energy change and the climate agenda. Europe has ambitions, and that has its price. This has consequences for our competitive position, but can be resolved by clarifying markets and rules.

Thirdly, let us invest in fair trade. Global competition requires a level playing field in which fair trade is guaranteed. We must strengthen our competitiveness by adapting European rules accordingly, actively pursuing fair trade within the WTO and updating European competition rules.

The EU and its Member States must do this. But his burden comes to us as citizens who have gathered in our local communities. The danger of globalisation and Europeanisation is that we do not pay enough attention to our local communities. It is precisely these communities that give us a sense of security and in which we live our own culture. This is not a matter for the EU, it is a matter for us to work on.

I am sure that we can all do the work together. After all, Europe has an entrepreneurial and free-thinking population, and we always raise the bar for ourselves. It is now up to the politicians to make the conditions for this success future-proof.

Jean-François van Boxmeer, CEO of Heineken.

“Young people do not think too deeply about the European peace project, but they casually accept the benefits of the international community, writes Angela Gifford, member of different Supervisory Boards, in our article series “Europe can do better. How our continent finds new strength. An wake-up call from economy“, initiated by Handelsblatt and United Europe. “However, they do not give the EU institutions good grades. A change process is urgently needed. Otherwise, the EU risks losing its most important electorate.”

Landing at Charles de Gaulle airport, the flight from Munich arrives on time, with our patchwork family on board. We are spending a week in Paris with our American daughter and our German son. Our daughter automatically rummages in her backpack for her blue (U.S.) passport, anticipating a long line in front of a stressed passport control officer. Her younger German brother asks in surprise, why does she need her passport? “We’re inside the EU.”

Like most of his generation, he takes the advances of the European Union and the Eurozone as a matter of course. He has never experienced border controls between France and Germany, never paid with Francs, Pesetas, Lira or Marks. And he has already forgotten that until recently there were high roaming charges, if you wanted to make mobile phone calls outside your home country. He knows the basic idea behind the “European Peace Project” only from his history lessons. For him, the Cold War is also from a dark, distant era.

A matter of trust
The unlimited freedom of travel within Europe is accepted as a given by the younger generation, as much as an Erasmus year in Sweden, or the search for jobs across the continent. A political idea has dramatically changed our lives in a few decades. But is that reality strong enough to sustain this European idea for the future? What if trust in all political institutions is fading, but especially in European institutions? When young people in particular do not listen to politics and do not feel that their ideas and concerns are being taken seriously?

Business enterprises, such as those I know as a member of management committees and supervisory boards, are always expected to embrace “disruptive change” and immediately adapt to new conditions, new markets, new technologies. On the contrary: political institutions must above all be stable. To change EU treaties (where every country has veto power) is by design a slow and arduous process. In addition, the (soon to be) 27 EU countries are very diverse and of different sizes, making it difficult to agree on institutional reform on a regular basis.

Here too, the time has come for a change process. This is not necessarily about “more Europe” but about “more confidence”. My personal rule for an effective transformational change process: “Those affected must become those involved” should also work in Europe.

Missing Consequences
The UK referendum on leaving the EU was fundamentally a vote of confidence. The British obviously trust their own institutions, which are almost a thousand years old, more than they trust EU institutions. This is true even though anyone who currently watches the British parliament on TV (inside or outside of Britain) is probably shaking their heads in dismay. With a narrow majority vote, the British people have shown that they do not have enough trust in the EU – perhaps wrongly and fueled by a sometimes-biased presentation of European politics by their own politicians or media.

Nevertheless, shouldn’t EU politicians, including (and especially) heads of state, draw some important conclusions from this referendum, for the benefit of future generations? A White Paper with scenarios for slightly more or less Europe, as the outgoing Commission President has put it, is not enough. And the very vague “Declaration of Rome”, which is now two years old, is unlikely to have convinced (or even reached) young people – despite the pomp and PR around it.

Of course, we can make it easy on ourselves, and refer to the general disinterest of the younger generation in the 2016 Brexit referendum. Although the young British were predominantly pro-European, a large group of them actually did not vote. Just over half of those between 18 and 24 years old participated in this vote which was so important to their own future.

It shows me that we as Europeans have failed to engage them. A constant reminder of the achievements of the past cannot sustain a highly complex construct such as the EU over the long run. Without new ideas for the future, the European idea will be forgotten. The lack of engagement of the younger generation will very likely become the biggest challenge and the most serious threat to the EU over the next decade.

Feeling like Europeans
There is also some good news. The TUI foundation’s latest study “Young Europe” seems to indicate that we have made a small comeback in Europe over the period 2017/18. The Foundation interviewed young Europeans aged 16 to 26 in all EU member states. 71 (previous year: 61) percent of respondents said they would vote in favor of keeping their country in the EU during an imaginary referendum. 66 (vs. 58) percent of young people no longer see themselves exclusively as citizens of their home country, but also as Europeans. But, as feared, only 33 percent trust EU institutions such as the European Commission and the European Parliament. And not even one in five think that the political system in his/her own country works as it should.

The vilification of the EU as a safe resting place for bureaucrats will not stop – especially with the growing populist currents throughout Europe. It is too simple (and effective) for a certain category of politicians to distract attention from their own shortcomings, by pointing to Brussels and Strasbourg. Inspiring people with authorities, policies, contracts and committees is difficult in any case. We have to take their questions, problems and concerns seriously and that includes difficult topics such as: Climate policy, organic farming, data and consumer protection, tax fairness, healthy competition, stricter banking supervision and the Digital Single Market.

There are many successful proof points to tell about the EU; for example, in the field of tourism. Today many people can be happy about cheaper airplane tickets: that is because the EU has made it possible through the liberalization of aviation since 1987. At the same time, it has strengthened safety standards, and public health insurance protects travelers when traveling across the EU. Tourist destinations and cultural monuments are often obtained with EU funds. Terrorism, a frequent concern of international travelers today, is fought by the EU member states together.

Coherence through tourism
Tourism companies are predestined to further popularize the European idea; and they take that seriously. After all, it is the personal ties between people from different European nations that make understanding and tolerance possible. Without the busy travel between the north and south of Europe in the 1960s and 70s, the history of European unification would be hard to imagine.

From 2008, after the financial and economic crisis, tourism in southern Europe was the central pillar of many economies: that included the investments of tourism companies in hotels and infrastructure, the jobs and internships provided especially for the many unemployed young people. In tourism, the formal entry barriers are low, and the development prospects are very good. The transfer of education, prosperity, environmental and social standards through tourism ensures that the living conditions in the countries of northern Europe and southern Europe are converging more and more over time. And it’s also about the people: it was the personal contacts between German tourists and Greek hosts, which contributed to the fact that the German-Greek friendship was never seriously threatened.

No one should be surprised if a tourism company and its leaders are fervent Europeans. For it is important to make Europe strong, also with regard to developments in the wider world. Old certainties suddenly disappear. The transatlantic alliance is drifting out of focus, and not just since Donald Trump moved into the White House. The center of power of the global economy is shifting to Asia. By the middle of this century, none of the EU countries will be able to compete on their own with the world’s major economies.

The management consultancy PWC described this loss of global significance in their study “The World in 2050”. According to this report, within 30 years Germany will be the only EU country among the ten largest economies in the world, in ninth place – behind newcomers such as Indonesia and Mexico. In such an environment, it is a complete aberration to seek salvation in the return to a simple nation state. And yet, exactly this has just happened in the UK.

Out of the comfort zone
EU members must act now and begin the process of change. Not just with rational explanations of the achievements of the EU, and not with more commissions where more smart people discuss how we want to live. But with a real reorganization and new motivation for the citizens and their elected representatives. If we want to inspire the youth to be in favor Europe, we have to face their questions and leave our comfort zone.

Political reorganization. There are many well-known lawyers in this field with far-reaching suggestions. Long ago we already could have voted to put the programs of our political parties into a European framework. The European Council, which consists of the heads of government of all member states, could be transformed into a second chamber of parliament, similar to the German Bundesrat. Digital initiatives must also be promoted and accelerated. The development of the Digital Single Market, the creation of a single European digital infrastructure, including the development of our European broadband network, and the intensification of cooperation on cybercrime are all just some of the issues we need to tackle, in order to remain competitive as Europe and attractive to our younger generation of “digital natives”.

Transparent lobbyism
And don’t we all agree that 30,000 lobbyists in Brussels are too many? Lobbying is not bad in and of itself, because it is a legitimate tool in the political decision-making process. But it must be transparent, and it must not develop a life of its own. Otherwise, the citizens turn away, especially young people, who feel especially helpless against this apparatus. Even instruments such as the European Citizens’ Initiative, a vehicle of direct democracy, made to address concerns of young people, are too often abused for the purposes of lobbyists. That must be prevented.

It is clear that the inertia and resistance will be enormous. But that must not hinder us. The EU has always been a place where well-established process leads to compromise between the differing interests of countries. That was their strength. They must now build upon that strength.

The article series “Europe can do better” appears in Handelsblatt in German and in German and English on Handelsblatt Online and the website of United Europe until the European Elections. They are also collected in a book which was published on 15 April, 2019 by Herder-Verlag. Please find more information about the book in German here.

About Angelika Gifford
Angelika Gifford is a member of the Supervisory Board of TUI AG in Hanover, ProSiebenSat.1 Media SE in Unterföhring and Rothschild & Co., Paris. Until the end of 2018, Gifford was managing director of Hewlett-Packard Deutschland GmbH (HP) in Böblingen and was responsible for software and digitalization for the German-speaking region. Prior to joining HP, Gifford held various leadership positions at Microsoft both domestically and abroad. For example, she headed the information and data security area for Europe, the Middle East and Africa. In addition, she served as a member of the management team of Microsoft Germany, representing the public sector customer segment. Angelika Gifford was named “Manager of the Year” by an independent jury in 2009 and is today one of the most influential managers of the digital industry in Germany. As board member of the Atlantik-Brücke, she is committed to transatlantic dialogue and cooperation. Angelika Gifford was born in 1965 in Essen, was educated as a business economist, and has three children.

“The image of Europe’s circle of stars is one of unity in diversity – but it lacks the connecting centre”, writes Simone Menne, manager and supervisory board member of several corporations, in our article series “Europe can do better. How our continent finds new strength. An wake-up call from economy“, initiated by Handelsblatt and United Europe. “This connecting centre cannot be one meant to force homogeneity; it has to be created and communicated.”

Europe’s diversity
Europe is diverse. It is a history; it is a utopia. It is a great collection of cultures, a community that is powerful in its union and one that has achieved – and can still achieve – a great deal.

And yet sustained effort is always needed to maintain this, because the cohesion of various, diverse groups of people is more demanding than keeping a homogenous mass together. It is worth the effort, because in both companies and cultures, diversity offers a chance to hear varying perspectives, discuss different arguments and then come up with a good solution.
Nations do not exist in nature; they are created again and again, reaffirmed by further development in consensus with all fellow citizens. And it isn’t just the political constitution, economic organisation or administrative structure that create cohesion, but also – as Peace Prize of the German Book Trade winner Aleida Assmann notes in The European Dream – the emotions and stories that their inhabitants share. The image of Europe’s circle of stars is one of unity in diversity – but it lacks the connecting centre. This connecting centre cannot be one meant to force homogeneity; it has to be created and communicated.

Europe’s fear
The current social climate is one of volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambivalence. Many European citizens are driven by fear for various reasons. The basis for this fear are overlapping global trends that appear complex and difficult to control, such as climate change, the rapid development of technology and artificial intelligence, global migration movements, demographic changes, concern about an economic downturn and a distribution of wealth that is at least perceived to be unfair. They also fear the loss of their autonomy, which had been laboriously fought for after years of dependence on totalitarian systems. Fear paralyses people because they feel that they can no longer control their own destiny.

People are frightened by the loss of their own identity, by material losses, by trepidation around their own security. There is also the phenomenon of threatened majorities: Those who have everything and therefore fear everything (Ivan Krastev). The media and politics emphatically report catastrophes, accidents and threats that fuel or exacerbate these fears.

There is also the fear of so-called deskilling – a buzzword at the World Economic Summit in Davos – according to which increased use of technological aids will cause human beings to lose the ability to make decisions themselves or to control their actions without these aids. Finally, the successful democracy-and-capitalism model is being called into question as well. In a Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung newspaper article from 27 July 2018, Clemens Fuest points to the shift in the balance of power to Asia and asks whether a model like Chinese state capitalism could be better suited to the future than Western market economies.

Although rationally it seems clear that global problems can only be solved globally, the instinctive reaction to fear and the feeling of losing one’s identity is the desire for a fortress that offers protection and is isolated from the outside world. Rejecting strangers and those who think differently serves another purpose as well: It helps to build a group identity. And another instinct is to seek homogeneity, as tribal societies could tolerate no outsiders in times of perpetual threat. The result has to this day been an instinctive aversion to those who stand apart. In an age of disruption and technological challenges, companies try to overcome these instincts and promote diversity by assembling teams consisting of people with different sexes, ages, experiences, and cultural backgrounds.

Isolated divisions within a company, the silo mentality, also pose a danger to corporate development, as more and more holistic thinking is needed to meet the demands of competition. Moreover, it is no longer possible to imagine a purely national economy in the face of international competition. At the same time, globalisation in business life is met increasingly with social and community division and island thinking. Despite the fact that, on average, globalisation has led to greater prosperity, health and security for the world’s population, many have experienced greater inequality in reality, or at least in their perception. Many feel a loss of dignity and identity.

Europe’s history
This conflicted situation has raised growing doubts about the European success model – doubts raised not only by those sections of the population that fear the loss of their homeland and further disappearance of their identity, but also by politicians who find their autonomy and power diminished in a diverse Europe. Groups of people with different views offer the opportunity to question the status quo and develop it on the basis of new ideas, and also to examine what has been tried and tested from different cultures and draw new insights from it. And yet this also requires a certain set of preconditions in the form of common values, a shared narrative and identity, along with the idea of the common good. Cultures lacking outside input tend to stagnate.

The narrative can and must be created out of Europe’s shared history. Successes such as decades of peace in the region and overall growth, as well as openness in dealing with one another – in the form of, among other things, borderless travel and mutual learning and working – must find a place as a shared memory in our great, joint history. It is about telling each other the story of times when we could finally travel from one country to another without passing through border checkpoints. Of days when we could finally pay for something in a neighbouring country without having to change money first. Of times when we could welcome former enemies as friends.

The successes of the effective integration of new EU partners and migrants also receive scant recognition. Rather than celebrating these successes, we see fanfare around local and national successes of the past, coupled with a repression of mistakes. This pride does not lead to a sense of community, but to a lack of flexibility and the oppression of those who hold different views. Europe’s history is too often reduced to regulation, bureaucracy and Brussels’ paternalism toward EU member countries. The advantages of regulation – namely the enlargement of the market for market participants – are rarely mentioned. It is about avoiding abuse, standardising guidelines so that all involved can play by the same rules and understand each other the way they do in traffic or in sports.

It is of course also important to clearly identify the shortcomings of European policy so as to learn from any mistakes. One of these is Ivan Krastev’s dictum of imitation, for example. New participants in the Union were not necessarily appreciated for their diversity and added as another valuable element in the kaleidoscope of cultures. Instead, they often had to adopt the values of existing members. Guidelines in the financial crisis, especially those written by countries that had failed to respect borders in the past, were perceived as paternalism and a gag. There were countries that gave loans. Some of this money was then used to pay for imports from debtors while at the same time it was suggested to them that they were subsidies. This was not a story of solidarity, but of power and domination.

The story must be heard and understood as a shared, diverse story. French journalist Natalie Nougayrède speaks of memory complexes and -blocks and believes that the psychological divide between East and West and North and South will deepen as long as Europeans continue to view their fellow Europeans through the lens of their own national history.

Creating a shared history offers a chance for those who live in Europe to regain their awareness of common values and identity as Europeans.

Europe’s future
Learning for the future means learning from the past. The cycle of revolution, euphoria, aging, hardening and growing dissatisfaction with existing systems looks like an endless story. The conflict between the degree of freedom of intelligence and the automatisms of the herd instinct provides a deeper explanation for these cyclical repetitions. Totalitarian society is a natural societal structure born of archaic urges. Any society can slip again and again into a totalitarian structure so long as this level of the human psyche dominates. But many people long for a different, free society that does justice to their critical intelligence and free will. Democracy is a social system well suited to this higher level of the human psyche. Nevertheless, a true democracy has no stabilising power structures and is therefore fundamentally unstable. It is fundamentally weak in its practicality, as physicist Gerd Ganteför writes in his book Das Gesetz der Herde (“The Law of the Herd”).

Critical thinking is the enemy of every fundamentalist religion and political movement, because it can expose unrealistic utopias and false facts, and identify and combat manipulation and arbitrariness. Thus critical thinking can stabilise democracy. If a democracy is to be stable in the long term, it must take basic human needs and values into account.
One of these basic needs is the feeling of being at home. One frequently misused argument is that a united Europe leads to the abandonment of one’s homeland. A homeland embodies security, trust, understanding and familiarity. But this homeland also remains within Europe: I love my city, my state and Europe – even love is diverse.

A democracy must provide people with a narrative for the future that can be shared by all. This is where Europe’s overall economic success falls short as a reason in itself. It always has to create an emotional element. Diversity plays a major role in this and presents an opportunity, particularly in a global world that is itself diverse. The ability to adapt to other cultures that nevertheless share a common set of values and history also helps us understand and deal with greater diversity in the world.

Independent art, culture, education and science are the cornerstones of a critical civil society for the future of Europe in all its diversity. This may be the basis of a common identity that, like the American dream of the past, unites a society with all its diversity. Francis Fukuyama writes in his book Identity that there can be no European identity. I do not share that view, because European history, but also the history of other cultures, has shown that new developments also give rise to new opportunities and identities.

Conclusion
• Europe does not mean a threat or even the loss of the nation states, but an opportunity for their protection and further development (Aleida Assmann).

• Cultures can only develop further if they learn from other cultures; they atrophy in isolation.

• Europe means cooperation when it comes to universal problems, whilst at the same time being autonomous with regard to local issues.

• We must develop a common European identity based on a common history, on existing common values and on a shared utopia. This allows Europe, in all its diversity, to develop in an innovative and democratic way and meet global challenges.

The article series “Europe can do better” appears in Handelsblatt in German and in German and English on Handelsblatt Online and the website of United Europe until the European Elections. They are also collected in a book which was published on 15 April, 2019 by Herder-Verlag. Please find more information about the book in German here.

About Simone Menne
Simone Menne, born in Kiel, where she also graduated from secondary school and university. After studying business administration, she began her career at the American company ITT before moving to the German airline Lufthansa in 1989. After holding various positions in Germany and abroad, including CFO at British Midland, she was appointed CFO of the LH Group in 2012. She was CFO at Boehringer Ingelheim from 2016 to 2017. Simone Menne is a member of the supervisory boards of BMW, DPDHL, Johnson Controls International and Springer Nature. She is a member of the Exchange Expert Commission and the DRSC.

“Europe has become a shared environment for work and study”, writes Antti Herlin, Chairman of the Board of Finnish KONE Corporation, in our article series “Europe can do better. How our continent finds new strength. An wake-up call from economy“, initiated by Handelsblatt and United Europe. “It is an enabler of global influence and success. The EU represents itself as a peaceful resolver of conflicts and platform for continent-wide development. These are its best export products and worth both the effort and cost of maintenance.”

The current EU was built on the firm belief of the war-torn generation that European cooperation and unity can prevent hostilities and another full-blown war in Europe. A second cornerstone of the project is Europe’s conviction that, united, it can be stronger, better able to face global economic competition, and better equipped to safeguard the natural resources of the planet.
A unified Europe has enabled a generation of Europeans to live without large-scale wars and enjoy long periods of economic prosperity, elevated social welfare and relative political stability. European integration opened the markets of single member states but did so in an orderly way while respecting high social and environmental principles. For companies from smaller member states, the Union paved the way for participation in global markets by creating a framework for trade and investment. The EU’s values also created added brand strength for European companies, signaling that they placed a high value on worker and end-user safety as well as human rights, democracy and the rule of law. The European example of cooperation was admired for the economic benefits and social stability it produced.

For a good example of the opportunities created by European integration, look no further than the history of KONE, the company I represent. In the mid-1960s, far-sighted corporate leaders recognized that national borders and restrictions on goods and services moving across them were going to become less significant in European commerce. KONE began a determined and accelerating internationalization that spread from Scandinavia throughout Europe. With a strong European base, it then became possible to compete successfully in North America and Asia. Today, KONE enjoys the role of market leader in China, a rare distinction for a European company.

After decades of learning how to serve customers in varied markets around the world, reconfiguring operations to conform to the boundaries of individual national markets would be disastrous in terms of logistics, personnel, technology and the way we conduct our business. The ability of personnel to move freely among EU countries has contributed not only to our growth but to our effectiveness as a service organization and our ability to provide customers in various markets with the best and most reliable solutions to their needs.

At the same time, our children increasingly travel to study, learn languages, and gain experiences of different cultures. As proud of their heritage as many of them are, their world view tends to be much more international than national. Like me, many of them are worried about recent developments in the world and especially in Europe.

During the past decade, a nationalist wave of protest over the perceived loss of sovereignty represented by the decision-making powers of a supranational EU has led to a rise in populist movements in almost all European countries. Most significantly, it has resulted in Brexit as well as the election of EU-skeptical governments in several Eastern and Southern European countries. The EU, itself, shares some of the blame for this, having rushed into expansion without ensuring that all the new members bought into the full concept. Failings related to transparency and the impact of the shared currency on countries that would normally have tried to improve their competitiveness by devaluating have caused many previous supporters to become doubters or proponents of leaving the union. The label of “elitism” is easily attached to an organization that is dominated by two powerful countries, even if decisions are made with the consent of all.

We know what a Europe based on cooperation and common institutions means today, but we can only guess what a return to a Europe of nation states that distrust one another would lead to. Who would take responsibility if rising nationalist sentiment were to result in a major war with no EU to mediate or intervene? The defenders of a peaceful and prosperous Europe need to take a stand and explain forcefully why we need a unified and collaborative Europe as much now as ever. Although we have avoided great wars for three-quarters of a century, recent experiences in the Balkans – or the even more recent conflict between Russia and Ukraine – show how easily they can return. There are other trends, too, that need to be managed collectively. First and foremost, we will need the EU to take on a pioneering role in tackling global warming.

Digitalization, robotics and artificial intelligence are affecting global economic competition, too, and not necessarily in favour of European companies. The character of work is experiencing a major change, not to mention the demographic challenge, which will hit Europe even harder than it already has and necessitate well-managed migration. These problems need to be addressed locally, of course, but It is the EU, rather than its member states, that is large enough to negotiate global solutions and shoulder a leadership role by rallying like-minded partners.

In the end, the most important argument for the EU’s existence is how it shapes our attitudes. Our generation perceives other European nations as friends, partners in the common European project, not as enemies. Europe has become a shared environment for work and study. It is an enabler of global influence and success. The EU represents itself as a peaceful resolver of conflicts and platform for continent-wide development. These are its best export products and worth both the effort and cost of maintenance.

The article series “Europe can do better” appears in Handelsblatt in German and in German and English on Handelsblatt Online and the website of United Europe until the European Elections. They are also collected in a book which was published on 15 April, 2019 by Herder-Verlag. Please find more information about the book in German here.

About Antti Herlin
Antti Herlin is the Chairman of the Board of KONE Corporation, one of the world’s leading manufacturers of elevators and escalators. He also serves as chairman and board member of several private and public companies and as chairman or board member of various charitable foundations. He is also the former chairman of the Confederation of Finnish Industries (Elinkeinoelämän Keskusliitto EK) as well the Technology Industries of Finland. Antti Herlin has been awarded several honorary doctorates.

The company KONE, listed on the Helsinki Stock Exchange, has belonged to the Herlin family since 1924 when Antti’s great-grandfather Harald bought the company from Strömberg, which today belongs to the international ABB group. In 1964, Heikki handed the company over to his son Pekka Herlin, who headed KONE as the Chairman of the Board until 2003. Pekka’s son Antti served as the CEO from 1996 to 2006.

You can find KONE’s products all around the world in such places as Shanghai Hongqiao International Airport and Makkah Clock Royal Tower hotel in Saudi Arabia. During his tenure as the CEO, Antti expanded KONE through a series of acquisitions and alliances. Antti holds shares in the Finnish media company Sanoma, owner of the Finland’s largest newspaper Helsingin Sanomat, as well as in Caverion, one of the biggest building service companies in the Northern Europe.

Antti Herlin owns a farm in Kirkkonummi where he raises Hereford and Aberdeen Angus beef cattle. He is married and a father of four children.

“Europe is lacking efficiency these days”, writes Dr. Jürgen Großmann, German entrepreneur and founder of United Europe e.V., in our article series “Europe can do better. How our continent finds new strength. A wake-up call from economy“, initiated by Handelsblatt and United Europe. “Germany has every reason to act smaller on the European stage and needs to stop making solitary decisions.”

The European millennium is a hundred years in the past – and it seems the American millennium that succeeded it is history, too. China has been preparing to supersede the United States for a long time now, and Europe is on a long braking path to permanent standstill. Hegelian dreams of a World Spirit settled at long last – if not in Germany, then at least in Europe –, have faded, and the end of the Arabellion probably showed even the most persistent optimists a far different reality: Western democracy is anything but a natural phenomenon spreading effortlessly across the globe.

She was once the beautiful sister of capitalism, successful not on account of her higher morals but by virtue of greater efficiency. Democracy is the market of political ideas, while the market is democratic competition among products and services. Once upon a time, the market outlived its usefulness as a customer seismograph once all the data had been gathered. Speaking at this year’s World Economic Forum 2019 in Davos, Catalan economist Xavier Sala i Martín said that democratic consensus-building is ultimately only an obstacle to implementing the product strategy that has already been acknowledged to be the right one. China has shown us that you don’t necessarily need civil liberties to thrive. State capitalism is building a magnetic levitation train line, while preliminary building enquiries have stalled in the country of its inventors. Autocratic Turkey is inaugurating Eurasia’s largest airport while diesel cars bullied off the market stand parked in the construction ruins of our failed Berlin-Brandenburg International Airport (BER). No wonder Europe is not only no longer sexy; it really is “the Old World” – only the term hardly stokes the pride that it once did. So what remains of the European millennium? While trousers, jacket, shirt and (sometimes even) a tie have displaced local clothing almost everywhere in the world, parliamentarianism, separation of powers and freedom of the individual are no longer export hits.

Everything we hold dear seems to have little appeal beyond European borders, and we’re already beginning to feel it. We are no longer the great model for other states and societies, and even we are starting to doubt ourselves.

Brexit has taught us many things, not least the advantage of representative democracy over public referendum. But it has also demonstrated how easily a population would toss a united Europe in the bin for nebulous promises of a return to former glory. In a way, Brexit was perfectly timed to show us how thin this European plant-nourishing humus layer really is. Making Europe more effective involves countless tangible projects that should have been implemented long ago: from a common tax policy to a pan-European military strategy to an apparently hopeless shared migration policy.

Against all reason
One could write volumes listing all the concrete steps that need to be taken to ensure that Europe remains a halfway serious global partner in the future, but – and this is a very, very big BUT – even if all these projects had worked out, it wouldn’t have made a difference. After all, it is ultimately the people who live in this Europe of ours who decide what happens to us. And as absurd as it sounds, Brexit is not proof of Europe’s failure, but of its greatness. Where else would a government, against all reason and its own understanding, implement the will of the majority of the people simply because it is the will of the people? Just as human beings are the only animals that can end their own their lives in a self-determined way, democracy is the only form of government that can run to misery on its own accord with its eyes wide open. The result is often regrettable, yet it is also one of the greatest achievements of human coexistence and … our shared European heritage, of which we can be proud. Still, if Europeans cannot manage to rekindle its citizens enthusiasm for it, then even a merger of Siemens’ and Alstom’s train divisions would not help.

All will be in vain if voters in Poland – which reaps the EU’s economic benefits like hardly any other country in Eastern Europe – put anti-European parties in power; the same can be said of Hungary, France, and even Germany, albeit not to the same extent. Every euro spent on saving Italy’s ailing public finances is money wasted if Italian voters put a bunch of lunatics in government. The old adage that people hate nothing as much as the hand that feeds them seems particularly apt in that regard. In a recent study on disenchantment with Europe, Andrés Rodríguez-Pose of the London School of Economics drew a map of European discontent. What it shows is that this is not happening in the poorest corners of Europe, but in deindustrialised regions whose inhabitants mourn their past stature and importance.

The feeling is not alleviated by social boons, either: Those “left behind” by the global shift in production are taking revenge at the ballot box. Anyone who used to assemble Nokia mobile phones for a living now has to deliver Samsung smartphones as a courier driver – and their psyches can’t cope. If even entire regions are de-industrialised like southeastern Saxony, then all that’s missing is unconditional basic income – as the ultimate scrapping premium for civic participation.

If we do not succeed in winning citizens’ votes there through economic revitalisation, then Macron’s transfer union won’t be of any use, either. It’s the economy, stupid! Yes, but hardly anything is “monocausal”. Even awareness of living in a common Europe is declining. Europeans have become alienated from one other; they no longer meet. Gone are the days when German marksmen’s clubs still travelled to their French twin city, when pupils spent a year in another European country instead of hitchhiking through Australia. It is these apparent trivialities that show us that Europe no longer comes first.

A video on YouTube shows 10,000 Japanese singing Beethoven’s “Ode to Joy” – in German! (It may sound strange but that is also why the EU-Japan trade agreement, or EPA, was so easily brought into being.) Why is it impossible to even imagine 1000 Britons or 100 Greeks singing the European anthem in German or Germans singing in Romanian when the country holds the EU Presidency? There is a Europe Day on 9 May, but it is only a public holiday in Kosovo and, starting 2019, in Luxembourg as well. 2018 saw the Northern German states introduce Reformation Day as a public holiday, and the State of Berlin – which clearly has nothing else to worry about – brought back the old socialist Women’s Day. It’s national narrow-mindedness wherever you look. We’ve been further along.

The introduction of the single currency and the Schengen Agreement showed the eurozone’s 350 million inhabitants just how far we’ve come in the unification process. There has been no joint project since then to instil the European idea in citizens’ everyday lives. Instead the self-proclaimed model pupil Germany has been going it solo: phasing out nuclear energy, then coal, and soon the combustion engine as well – with all the highhandedness of morally, ecologically superior authorities.

Irrespective of whether these decisions were the right ones to make, they are wrong-to-short-sighted in two respects: They are wrong above all because none of the other partners were involved in these solitary decisions. Much of the European resentment that has arisen in Eastern and Southern Europe is basically resistance to German arrogance.

The good news is that we can change this ourselves. Rather than import evil nuclear power from France when our wind turbines lull and disposing of sorted-out Euro-V diesel in Poland, a European vote on a common energy and climate policy would be prudent. The German solo efforts were and are short-sighted for the simple reason that major economic investments cannot be made as often as one likes.

A patchwork of signal dead spots
Better a hundred thousand working torches than ten state-sponsored lighthouses! The immense financial resources required for an energy turnaround, from grid expansion to storage, can no longer be spent elsewhere – that much is certain. And this not-so-exotic “elsewhere” country is right on our doorstep: broken roads and bridges, dilapidated public buildings, collapsing railways, large-scale projects that take more than a lifetime to complete. And these are just the good old analogue tasks that are waiting to be tackled and paid for. What person is going to listen to a politician babbling about digitisation for the umpteenth time when he himself has to drive daily through a patchwork of signal dead spots and the loose ends of the fibre optic cables in front of his house have been sadly peering out of the holes in the ground for months. In other words: Germany has every reason to lower its sights and act smaller on the European stage. Instead of wallowing in complacency as the only advocate of the human West, one might ask how Estonia manages to supply its small population with fast Internet before Huawei shows the Germans how they do things in China.

And here we come again to the beginning of our story: Europe, this vermiform appendix on the western edge of Asia, is a tremendously rich country in terms of culture, prosperity and shared history. The sad thing about wealth is that it is usually harder to secure it than to acquire. And that is precisely the position Europe is in today.

The status quo of social, economic and above all democratic achievements is fragile. Post-war Europe is a wonder of world history for which we should be grateful, a truly awesome and humbling accomplishment! The best approach is to put our own freedoms on a healthy economic basis, otherwise they threaten to disappear along with it – and we should do this before the 30 millionth pensioner closes his old computer with dead software for the very last time at age 63.

German politicians can also do a lot to make this happen:
• fewer unilateral moves on Germany’s part and more consensus with European neighbours when it comes to far-reaching decisions

• Europe-wide uniform conditions for companies with regard to taxation, subsidies and business location policy

• Targeted immigration policy also with a view to economic interests

• Support for students in STEM subjects

• Use of educational resources available to low-income groups

• Linking the retirement age to life expectancy. Perhaps then we will even manage to fill the “value gap” within Germany (80 percent of West Germans consider democracy to be the best of all forms of government, but only 50 percent of East Germans do.) We have every reason to lower our sights and act smaller in Europe, so let’s get started quickly.

The article series “Europe can do better” appears in Handelsblatt in German and in German and English on Handelsblatt Online and the website of United Europe until the European Elections. They are also collected in a book which was published on 15 April, 2019 by Herder-Verlag. Please find more information about the book in German here.

About Dr. Jürgen Großmann
Dr. Jürgen Großmann, born 1952 in Mülheim an der Ruhr, studied iron metallurgy and business administration in Germany and in the United States. He wrote his master’s thesis in Brazil and his doctoral thesis at the Technical University of Berlin. Großmann began his career at Klöckner-Werke at the age of 28, where he eventually became a member of the Management Board. At the age of 41, he took over the bankrupt Georgsmarienhütte steelworks for symbolic two deutsche marks. He expanded it in the following decade into a group with over 30 companies, sales of several billion euros and a workforce of 7000 employees. He co-founded the non-profit association United Europe e.V. in 2013 along with Wolfgang Schüssel. He is Chairman of the Supervisory Board of SURTECO SE, Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the RAG Foundation, member of the Supervisory Board of Hanover Acceptances Ltd. London and a member of The Holdingham International Advisory Board, London. Jürgen Großmann is married to music publisher Dagmar Sikorski. The couple has three adult children.

Dear Eurosceptic,

Let’s talk about Europe. You’d rather not? You’re not against Europe, just tired of it? That doesn’t surprise me. You’ve developed an acute allergy to political sermons and calls to rally around the European flag? Me too. You don’t want to hear anything more about quotas, product bans, and emission thresholds? I can readily understand. You’ve stopped following every minor skirmish in the War of the Roses between the EU and the UK? Who hasn’t.

And yet: we have to talk about Europe. Because, whether we like it or not, Europe remains our only opportunity to hold our own in the complex and challenging world of the twenty-first century. The desire for a small, manageable, and secure homeland is understandable. But the truth is: that alone won’t ensure us a good future. We have to talk about Europe because Europe’s future is more uncertain than many think. In losing the UK, Europe is losing on its strongest pillars. In economic terms, it’s as if the EU’s 19 smallest economies left at once. A deep and painful loss.

But Eurosceptics are gaining ground not just in the UK but in other member states as well. Nevertheless, Europe’s biggest problem isn’t that it has so many opponents. Rather, its biggest problem is that so few of its supporters are willing to state their allegiance openly and to act accordingly. Even though they know how much we need the EU today and how much more we’ll need it in the future in order to live the way we Europeans take for granted: in peace and prosperity.

For once let’s not look west across the Channel but east, across the former boundary between the twentieth century’s two competing systems, to Eastern Europe. Because there we’ll see what great things we in Europe are still capable of. The EU’s two waves of eastern expansion in 2004 and 2007 put the countries of Central and Eastern Europe where they’d always been and where they belong: in the heart of Europe. The liberation from dictatorship and dependence on a foreign superpower began a success story that has improved the lives of the people who live there and has also enriched all of Europe. Economic growth in Eastern Europe is consistently stronger than in the West and, increasingly, is benefiting ordinary citizens. Although wages are lower than in the West, they’re rising swiftly across the region. At the same time, unemployment is significantly lower. The unemployment rates in the Czech Republic, Poland, and Hungary are now among Europe’s lowest. A shortage of skilled labor is emerging in some job categories, just like in the West. These countries have achieved so much, right in the heart of Europe.

At E.ON, we’re proud to be part of this success story. The roots of our operations in Romania, Slovakia, the Czech Republic, and Hungary extend far into the last century. We supply energy to 7.8 million customers in these countries. Our planned takeover of innogy will significantly enhance our operations in Eastern Europe and extend them to other countries in the region. All of this will benefit our customers there. We’ve witnessed these countries’ impressive progress, economic upswing, and renascent European identity from up close and done our best to support these welcome trends. From our own experience, we’re just as familiar with the successes this has brought as with the almost unavoidable social tension. My many visits to Eastern Europe have given me a lot of sympathy for this region and its warm-hearted, pragmatic people who are justly proud of their achievements. They provide strong evidence that the European idea is alive and deserves the support of Europeans everywhere.

Western Europe perceives some of the EU’s Eastern European members as irritating, or, to put it less diplomatically, obdurate. The debate about issues like migration, the rule of law, and relations with Russia is frequently divided along east-west lines. As a result, some people have an image of Eastern Europe characterized by narrow-mindedness, nationalism, and intolerance. This viewpoint ignores not only the considerable differences between the countries of the region but also the enormous achievements of its peoples. They have every reason to be proud of the democratic institutions they’ve established after decades of repression. And every right, within the bounds of shared European values, to chart their own course. In view of their historical experience, who can seriously wonder that people in Eastern Europe are hypersensitive to patronization from the West. One doesn’t have to defend every political development in Eastern Europe to expect this core region of Europe to be treated respectfully. Western Europe would do well to expend more effort to learn to understand and to respect the specific, historically determined situation of its Eastern neighbors.

Finally, the concerns of Eastern Europeans are shared by many in Western Europe. They too wonder how to belong to an open and tolerant Europe but still retain our countries’ many particularities. The descent of this into chauvinism or narrow-minded nationalism isn’t just a peculiarity of a few Eastern European countries. Bulgarian political scientist Ivan Krastev writes that the divergence between Western and Eastern Europe’s attitudes toward diversity and migration is very similar to the divergence between urban and rural attitudes in the West (After Europe, 2017) In short, Western Europe has no grounds for self-righteousness. The gilets jaunes aren’t marching in Prague or Bucharest. Brexit isn’t taking place in Poland or Hungary. The sense of alienation and uncertainty extending across Europe is dividing—threatens to sunder—the European community. A Europe of elites won’t work.

My interactions in Eastern European countries have shown me again and again that their peoples have retained a strong sense of the plurality of cultural traditions. Of the role plurality plays and the opportunities it creates. That some things should be standardized but not everything. That’s a fundamentally European notion. Plurality is Europe’s strength, particularly today. Because the world has reentered a phase in which technology will play a decisive role in determining the future global distribution of prosperity and the relative competitiveness of the various regions of the world. In this it resembles the race to industrialization of the nineteenth century. But this time Europe is lagging behind. We need to catch up. It would be naive to think we can simply copy Silicon Valley, which emerged at a certain time under very specific circumstances that can’t be replicated. But the preconditions for dynamic innovation aren’t restricted to Silicon Valley: innovations happen where people with a wide variety of personal, cultural, and professional backgrounds can share ideas freely and openly. We can do that in Europe—and perhaps even better than in some other places around the world. A productive plurality is traditionally a European strength that, however, has somewhat fallen from view. Yet as early as 1997 Ernst-Wolfgang Böckenförde, a former judge on Germany’s Federal Constitutional Court, said that Europe is in the process of allowing economic forces to homogenize the peculiarities of its peoples.

Of course, there are areas in Europe where we need a uniform regulatory environment. Energy, climate protection, and telecommunications, to name just three. Of course, the single European market and a common currency provide big advantages for citizens and companies alike. But those alone can’t provide Europe with a good future. Large segments of the population wouldn’t accept the unification of Europe for economic reasons alone or out of cold pragmatism. Europe therefore needs to rediscover its plurality. If we can’t become like the United States and certainly not like China and don’t even want to, then we should become more European again. And that means embracing plurality and utilizing its productivity. In line with its shared values, Europe needs more subsidiarity in decision-making processes, more room for the plurality of regional and cultural identities, more different and attractive ways of living, particularly in rural areas. Europe must once again be a sanctuary for—not a threat to—the right of its citizens to live as they wish.

So let’s talk about Europe. About the Europe that needs you and the other skeptics: your constructive criticism, your commitment, and your vote in the European elections. Particularly at a time when, to use Bertrand Russell’s words, “fools and fanatics are so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.”

Best wishes,
Johannes Teyssen

The letter is part of the article series “Europe can do better. How our continent finds new strength. A wake-up call from economy“, which was initiated by Handelsblatt and United Europe. The series appears in Handelsblatt in German and in German and English on Handelsblatt Online and the website of United Europe until the European Elections. They are also collected in a book which was published on 15 April, 2019 by Herder-Verlag. Please find more information about the book in German here.

About Dr. Johannes Teyssen
Johannes Teyssen was born in Hildesheim, Germany, on October 9, 1959. He studied law and economics in Freiburg, Göttingen and Boston. After finishing his studies, he worked at the University of Göttingen for several years and received a doctorate in law.
He began his professional career at E.ON in 1989, when he joined the electricity generation division of E.ON’s predecessor VEBA in Hanover. There he held various leadership positions, firstly in Legal Affairs and later in Key Account Sales. From 1998 to 2001, Teyssen managed an associated company of the E.ON Group, operating in electricity and gas distribution and sales, with approximately one million customers in the German states of Lower Saxony and Sachsen-Anhalt. From 2001 to 2006 he was a member of the Board of Management of the E.ON Group’s central management company in Munich, responsible for all electricity-related activities, including large-scale electricity generation, transmission grids and the downstream business in Germany as well as in Central and Eastern Europe, initially as Chief Financial Officer and later as Chief Executive Officer.
In 2004, Johannes Teyssen was also appointed to the Board of Management of E.ON SE in Düsseldorf, where he was responsible for the management of all customer- and market-related activities. From 2008 to 2010, he was in charge of managing the Group’s ongoing operations as Vice Chairman of the Board of Management.
In 2010, Johannes Teyssen was appointed to his current role as CEO of E.ON SE. In this position, he is responsible for the E.ON Group’s Strategy and Portfolio, Human Resources, Communications & Political Affairs, Legal & Compliance, Corporate Audit and E.ON’s equity investment in Turkey.
Johannes Teyssen has also played a leading role in various other associations over the past few years. He was President of Eurelectric, the European umbrella organisation of the electricity sector (from 2013 to 2015) and the World Energy Council’s Vice Chair responsible for Europe (from 2006 to 2012). Since 2010, he has been a member of the Presidential Board of the Federation of German Industries (BDI). Since June 2017 he has been a member of the Shareholders’ Committee of Nord Stream AG.