> Home > Articles > News > The Greens - Partisans for a Europe of Ethnicities
The Greens - Partisans for a Europe of Ethnicities
Date 21/08/2014 10:58  Author webmaster  Hits 4596  Language Global
by Pierre Hillard

Introduction

The European Green Party is intent upon promoting regional identities within the European Union (EU) frankly envisaging a complete re-shaping of the EU into a hotch-potch of ethnic elements.

This project was begun, and is being sustained, by Germany, which, through exploiting neighbouring German-speaking minorities, will emerge as the only political unit to be strengthened by such a re-distribution of power.

Moreover, the concept has been taken up, and is being supported, by the US’ State Department and various American, political foundations, which are, thereby, applying the so-called “Wolfowitz Doctrine”.

Washington considers it highly desirable that the Europeans should be deprived of their nation-states, for this would facilitate their absorption, as a gaggle of statelets, led by a Mother Goose in Brussels (or Berlin) into a globalised free-market, entirely dominated by the USA.

Pierre Hillard has a doctorate in political science and is a professor of international relations. His researches bear, principally, on the workings of the EU and its transformation into part of a transatlantic bloc. His latest published work is “Bertelsmann: a media-empire, and foundation, in the service of supranationalism” (éditions Francois-Xavier de Guibert, 2009).

Hillard analyses the Greens’ “ethno-europe” in the following article.


 
The map of Europe as the European Greens would like it to be (click on image to enlarge)

This (see map) is what the project to fragment the states of Europe looked like, in detail, in 2004.

In an earlier article [1] I presented a map produced (in 1997) by the “Democratic Party of the Peoples of Europe – European Free Alliance” (DPPE-EFA) sitting at the European Parliament. That map showed the various “national” or “independence” parties, which were attempting to autonomise regions within the states of the then 15-member EU. Some of those parties were already acquiring prestige as they began to take over the management of regional politics. This was the case with the “Esquerra Republicana de Catalunya” (ERC) of Josep Luis Carod Rovira, a Catalan “independence-party”, which was allied to the Socialist Party of the regional president, Pasqual Maragall. Of course, such regional, “independence” parties would not have achieved much, if the developing structures of the EU had not been favourable to them. Indeed, everything in the founding documents of the EU concurred to lend amplitude to the claims of the ethno-regionalists. Because EU-law acts to repress national law, it tends to confer heroic status on regional politicians, when these are making their case, in Brussels, and empowers them to form political alliances, which influence the electorates of their respective regions in their favour.

The Spanish elections of 2003 provided a particularly striking example of this.

Catalan Demands

In Catalonia, the Socialist Party could not have come to power without the self-interested support of the ERC. His reliance on this support obliged Pasqual Maragall, the Catalan Regional President, to make compromises, which went to the very heart of the Spanish state, as he did, when he reminded the “Barons of Socialism”, in Madrid, that, out of eleven million votes for the Parti Socialiste Ouvrier Espagnol (PSOE) a million-and-a-half were from Catalonia [2] Consequently, the Zapatero-government of the PSOE could not have remained in power without making concessions to the separatists.

So it was that Spanish universal suffrage came to be discoloured by the ethnic and linguistic illusions, which are undermining Spanish democracy; and this process has only just begun. The principle of ethnic voting is gaining ground throughout the Iberian Peninsula.

The President of the ERC, J.L.C. Rovira, was thus able gently to remind the socialist leadership:

“We have voted for the investiture of Jose Luis Zapatero, but this was not a blank cheque! The PSOE now has the opportunity to show that the Spanish Government has policies, which are not those of the Right. We hope that these policies will be multi-lingual, multi-cultural, multi-national and federal (…) If they are not, then the separatist choice for Catalonia will become ever more attractive” [3]

It was certainly not by chance that Zapatero then recognised a need “to re-define the architecture of the Spanish state”. One of the first effects of this re-definition was to be the translation of the EU’s Constitutional Treaty into Basque, Catalan and Galician. For the regionalists – especially those of Catalonia – such translation was completely justified. If the numerically inferior Estonians, Maltese and Danes can have their own versions, why, they asked, “discriminate against” the six-and-a-half-million-strong inhabitants of Catalonia?

Basque Claims

In the Spanish Basque-Country, another political brush-fire threatened to blaze on after the summer’s election-period. Juan José Ibarretxe, President of the Basque-Provinces, expressed the wish that his region should be “freely associated” with Spain, but should receive a new devolution of administrative and judicial powers, as well as a right of self-determination and a recognition of Basque nationality. According to the protagonists of this plan, the Basque-Country should even obtain direct representation at all levels of EU-administration [4] The political debate on the Ibarretxe-Plan was to begin, in the autumn of 2004, among the various components of the Basque Government, namely, “The Basque Nationalist Party (PNV – member of the EFA), the “Eusko Alkartasuna” (member of the EFA) and “Ezker Batua-Izquierda Unida” (the united Basque Left) but the ethnic passions of the delegates were inflamed, above all, by stimuli proceeding from outside. As previously stated, regionalist impulses are mainly explicable in terms of encouragement from, or via, Brussels, for the ethno-regionalist cause; but they are sustained also by gangs of agitators, hired to facilitate the fragmentation of the nation-states [37] The increasingly corrosive activity of the EFA, led, since July 2004, by Ian Hughton, a member of the Scottish National Party (SNP) which is allied to the Greens (Greens-EFA, co-presidents Monica Frassoni and Daniel Cohn-Bendit) is particularly significant.

The Greens-EFA

Most of the pan-EU political parties are – like the European Socialist Party and the European People’s Party – besotted with the notion of a mega-state, in which powers are increasingly devolved, from the nation-states, to their regions; but the EFA – like the lure, used in hare-coursing – plays a mobilising role in this, at the battlefront itself. In March 2004, the EFA acquired new scope, when it set up a well-funded association, drawing together the various, EU-regional, so-called “independence” movements.

No longer called “PDPE-ALE”, but only “ALE” (European Free Alliance – EFA) it was formed out of the thirty EU-regional political parties, which signed the “Barcelona Declaration”, and adopted an electoral manifesto entitled “Towards A Europe of Diversity” [7] The principal aim of EFA is to establish two legislative chambers in the EU: one based on the existing, elected “European Parliament”, and the other based on the EU-Council, representing – not national governments – but “all the EU’s autonomous, territorial entities”. Other objectives include “the recognition of all the languages spoken in Europe”, the transfer, “to devolved authorities, of oversight and management of all Structural Funds”, “the freedom to organise inter-regional and cross-border cooperation, without any interference from national governments”, the construction of “euroregions” (EU-regions, which transcend national borders), the banning of all discrimination on grounds of ethnicity, religion or sexuality (as provided in Articles 21 and 22 of the EU-Charter of Fundamental Rights) and the establishment of a Common Foreign Policy for the EU.

These “Mosaic Tablets” were destined to weigh heavily on the political landscape of the EU, owing to the alliance between the EU-regionalist parties and the Greens. The latter were the first, in February 2004, to form a “Pan-EU Political Party”, gathering together, in Rome, all the environmentalist movements of the EU-states [8] The German Green Party – the most powerful of these – impregnated this new Party with its own thinking and soon benefited from the appointment of its Leader, Josef Fischer, to the post of Foreign Minister in the German Government.

The journalist, Konrad Schuller, of the Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagszeitung, delivered himself of an article, about the founding of this pan-EU Green Party, under the frank, and just, title, “Under German Leadership: The Greens of the Continent” (“Unter Deutscher Führung: die Grünen des Kontinents”) [9]

It is certainly true that the principles vaunted by Greens-EFA correspond to those set out in EU-German documents, which, to an ever greater extent, are shaping the policies of the EU. Moreover, the Greens-EFA becomes ever more influential as EU-regionalist parties multiply and rally to it. Add to these factors the decisive role played by organisations working for the German Interior Ministry (Bundesministerium des Innern – BMI) such as the “Federalist Union of European Ethnic Communities” (FUEEC) and the “European Centre for Minorities’ Issues” (ECMI) [10] all of which are supported, of course, by EU-funds. Thus, closer and closer come the elements dear to the spirit of German policy – such as regionalisation – and the recognition of ethnic identity turns up, more and more often, in the political debates of the EU-states.

The New Map of Europe

Before advancing further into the ethnic labyrinth, we should compare the evolution of this phenomenon, as shown on the attached Greens-EFA map of spring 2004, with that portrayed on a similar map of 1997 [11] Going from West to East, we see that Spain has been split (by the Greens-EFA) into three more regions (than in 1997) The three new ones are Andalusia, Aragon and the Balearic Islands. Like these, in 2004, two Italian regions have been added (and have joined the Greens-EFA!) namely, Venetia and Emilia-Romagna. This Italian novelty is all the more important, because these regions already belonged to the “working community of the Alps and the Adriatic”, an off-shoot of the EU-German “Association of European Frontier-Regions” [12] Alsace-Lorraine, which, astonishingly, was integrated into the German corpus in 1997, finds itself, in 2004, as a separate territory, which is reminiscent of its status as an Imperial Electorate (Reichsland) prior to 1914! The inverse of this transformation applies to Savoy (attached to France, in 1997, but detached in 2004) but it is in Central Europe, that we see the biggest changes.

With the expansion of the EU to 25 states, from 1st of May 2004, one sees an even more dramatic fragmentation of the nations on Germany’s eastern borders: the south of Lithuania with its Polish minority, Silesia, Moravia, the strip of territory along the length of southern Slovakia, the Banat of Serbia, Roumanian Transylvania (these last three regions all having strong Hungarian majorities) [13] and Greek Macedonia (with its access to the sea at the always busy port of Salonika) all have regionalist parties, which have joined the Greens-EFA. Even if a national frontier continues to exist between Albania and Kosovo, the 2004-map, nevertheless, presents these two entities in the same shade of blue. This is certainly not for lack of colours to choose from! Thus, everywhere, along the western and eastern frontiers of Germany – or, more exactly, those of the German-speaking bloc – the other EU-states are cracking and splitting, and a multitude of regional dwarves are left in attendance upon the undiminished giant at the centre of Europe.

These accretions to the Greens-EFA, and the characteristics and objectives of these Central European EU-regions, are particularly well expressed by Bartlomiej Swiderek (executive-bureau member and international affairs spokesman of the “Autonomist Movement of Silesia” (AMS): “Silesia or, more exactly, Upper Silesia where the AMS is politically active, is considered to be a ‘Region-Nation’, situated between Poland, Germany and Bohemia. It is not a nation in the strict sense of the term, but a mixture of linguistic, ethnic and cultural components, be these components Germanic, Polish, Czech or simply Silesian (…) The AMS’ principal claim is for political, fiscal and cultural autonomy, in the bosom of a great, european community of regions. Such an autonomy should be modelled on that of Catalonia or, more generally, on the German and Austrian system of ‘Länder’. As a federalist movement, the AMS wishes to see Poland transformed into a federation of regions, each capable of playing a significant role at the heart of a de-centralised Europe (…)

“We are very active in inter-regional cooperation with like-minded movements and political parties across the EU, particularly with those which belong to the ‘European Free Alliance of the Peoples of Europe’ (EFA) We are cautious about forming ties with any other factions, which means that we cooperate only with political parties, which are fully democratic, which abstain from violence and which do not take extremist positions. Thus we count among our partners ‘the Savoyard League’, ‘the Basque Nationalist Party’ (PNV) ‘Basque Solidarity’ (Eusko Alkartasuna) ‘Plaid Cymru’ (Welsh “Nationalist”) and the ‘Moravian Democratic Party’. Because the EU is involving itself so enthusiastically in regional matters, we believe that its structure is one, which will allow us to attain our goal: an autonomous Silesia, at the heart of a ‘Europe-of-Regions’ (…)” [14]

The principals upheld by the AMS take on quite a different quality in the context of an EU-party like the Greens-EFA which amplifies such claims. It is interesting to note also that this Silesian representation is itself represented, not only in Poland (Rybnik) and Brussels (as one would expect) but also in Germany (at Bensheim) and (would you believe?) in the USA (at Clearwater) [15] However, behind the structures of the Greens-EFA and in liaison with them, a swarm of institutes is proliferating, facilitating exchanges and promoting a common policy among all the regionalist movements. It is not possible to describe the myriad meetings and conferences, at which the exponents of a tribal EU meet and form a united front. Nevertheless, we can cite some examples, which illustrate this networking of ethnicities and the leading role played in it by Germany.

The Role of Germany

The 49th Congress of the “Federalist Union of European Ethnic Communities” (FUEEC) took place from 20th to 22nd May 2004, in Poland, at the country-house of one Kamian Slaski.

A high official of the German Interior Ministry (BMI) Detlev Rein, the successor to Rolf Gossmann [16] set the tone for this meeting, which was well attended by the ethnocentric intelligentsia. The steering-committee of the FUEEC has an international membership – Swiss, Croat and Danish – but I should point out that one of the members is a British, or Cornish, representative, namely, Nigel Hicks (a member also of the Cornish Stannary Parliament) [17] Collusion between Greens-EFA and FUEEC was revealed, most strikingly, by the presence of the “Rainbow Party” (Macedonian Party of Greece) which is a member of both entities [18] At the subsequent Congress of the EFA and the Rainbow Party, on 30th of May 2004 at Thessalonika, one of the vice-presidents of FUEEC, Bela Tonkovic, took part alongside Georg Nakratzas, counsellor on Balkan Affairs to the EFA [19] The interconnecting links are legion between these and other institutes, all of which have connections, via FUEEC with the German Interior Ministry.

Similarly, at its conference in Prague (1998) FUEEC had featured Bojan Brezigar, president of the “European Bureau for Lesser-Used Languages” (EBLUL) [20] Indeed, the vice-president of EBLUL, Jean-Luc Fauconnier, took part in the conference organised by Eurig Wyn (representative of Plaid Cymru on the EFA-board) on the 13th of October 2003, to discuss setting up an EU-agency to promote linguistic diversity [21] Besides the above-mentioned activists, at FUEEC’s 49th Congress, were also the director of the Galician “Bloque Nacionalista Galego” (BNG – member of the EFA) Camilo Nogueira, a senior official of the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) John Packer (OSCE) whom we saw also at the FUEEC’s conference in Bozen, in 2003 [22] and Francois Grin, member of the board of the “European Centre for Minorities’ Issues” (ECMI) [23] ECMI works in direct liaison with the German Interior Ministry, which is not surprising, considering that one of ECMI’s founders was Manfred Carstens, a high official of the BMI [24] ECMI also maintains close links with FUEEC. Representatives of ECMI, including its director, Marc Weller [25] and the entire board of FUEEC, had all met, on the 31st of March 2004, to define tasks and share them out between the two institutes [26] All these contacts and exchanges, on the question of ethnic identity, took a decisive turn with the institution of a programme called “The Bozen Declaration”, on the 1st of May 2004. This programme is being run under the supervision of the “European Academy” (EurAc) of Bozen, which was founded in 1992 on the initiative of the South-Tirol [28]

Promoting Ethnic Identity

Following a colloquium, in Bozen, on the 30th and 31st of January 2004 – where more than 90 specialist and political NGO’s [29] gathered – several objectives were defined. Accordingly, the pace of promoting ethnic identity throughout Europe, was to be quickened, by means of cooperation between the Council of Europe, the OSCE and the EU. Moreover, the protection of minorities was to be made one of the EU’s criteria and to become a test, for the EU-states, of their respect for “human rights”. The signatories of the “Bozen Declaration” were, among others, Bojan Brezigar (president of EBLUL) and Michl Ebner, a German-speaking, Italian EU-deputy of the EPP, who had been in at the adoption of the original resolution (in favour of “Minority and Regional Languages and Linguistic Diversity”) at the EP’s “Culture Committee”, in September 2003 [30] Indeed, it is the same Michl Ebner, whom we had already seen at the FUEEC-conference, in Bozen, of 2003, along with the General Secretary of EBLUL, Markus Warasin [31] On the list of signatories to the “Bozen Declaration” (2004) we find again John Packer (OSCE) Marc Weller (director of ECMI) Joseph Marko (an EFA-contact and an editor of the revue “Europa Ethnica” – he had also been a member of the consultative committee on the framework-convention “for the protection of minorities”, in 1999) [33] and Gabriel von Toggenburg, an active member of EurAc, who had also attended FUEEC’s 2003-Congress, in Bozen. Further to this “Bozen Declaration”, another tract was published, entitled “Minority-Protection and the Enlarged European Union – The Way Forward” [34] Among the many contributors to this publication, we find, in addition to many of the names mentioned above, Rainer Hoffmann, president of the consultative committee in charge of verifying the proper application of the “framework-convention for the protection of minorities” (he is also a member of the steering-committee of ECMI [35] one of the editors of the revue, “Europa Ethnica”, and an EFA-contact) Hoffmann is directly connected to the German government: recalling the appointment of Hoffmann, the German Foreign Minister clearly stated the basis of Hoffmann’s nomination, as follows

“The present chairman of the Committee (Ed. – of the “framework-convention for the protection of minorities”) is a professor of law appointed by the Federal Government, namely, Prof. Dr. Rainer Hoffmann of the University of Kiel” [36]

All the activities mentioned above were carried on with the approval, and the active support, of the highest levels of EU-administration. In fact, even if EurAc (Bozen) does fulfil an essential, academic function, at least part of it deals exclusively with boosting the centralisation of EU-power, using the protection of minorities as an excuse. It does this under the sponsorship of “the Platform for an Enriching Culturally and Ethnically Diverse Europe” (PECEDE) together with other EurAc institutions, with the EU-Commission and with the “Open Society Institute” (OSA) of George Soros [37] Thus are the German/EU-measures, dealing with “Ethnic Identity”, developed [38] The penetrating effect of these initiatives becomes obvious, when we consider that ECMI, EFA and even EurAc (Bozen) work within the EU-institutions and in the Council of Europe, and, especially, in the entities concerned with “the proper application of the framework-convention on the protection of minorities” [39]

Anglo-Saxon influence is in there too. Also involved, at the highest levels, are the “International Minority-Rights Group”, of London, and the “Project on Ethnic Relations” (PER) of Princeton, USA. The presence of the PER at the core of the European and EU-institutions, began in 1991. Its stated purpose is to prevent ethnic conflicts in Central and Eastern Europe, including Russia, which reveals the intentness of the USA’s interest. Numerous American organisations provide support to the PER, and one should not be surprised that these include the Carnegie Foundation [40] The US Department of State, the Rockefeller-Brothers’ Foundation, the Ford Foundation [41] and the Marshall Fund (Germany) [42] to name but a few …

Conclusion

We can be sure that the ethnic identity network is very extensive. At any rate, the abundance of documents, promoting ethnic regionalism, and the seniority and key-positions of their authors, allow us to affirm that the plans have been laid to accelerate the fragmentation of the EU’s nation-states. The “Scottish National Party” (SNP – member of the Greens-EFA) published, as early as 16th of September 2002, a written constitution for an “independent” Scotland, entitled “A Constitution For A Free Scotland” [43] The statements of John Swinney, leader of the SNP, predicting, in 2003, that Scotland would be “independent” (of the UK, but not, of course, of the EU) by 2007 [44] reveal the optimism, which buoys up the ethno-regionalist movements. Whether this optimism reflects reality, or whether it is simply precipitous, wishful thinking, on the part of the SNP-leader, such statements manifest the confidence and ambition of the SNP and of the shoal of regionalist-separatist parties, which are following the line set by EFA, the EU and the German government. The leaders of Greens-EFA are therefore already congratulating themselves on the course events have taken so far; but do they not see that they are opening a veritable Pandora’s Box, from which instability, wars and the enfeeblement of Europe in general, will issue and precipitate chaos, just as a similar process did in the former Yugoslavia?

Original, in French
______________________________

[1] « L’Allemagne et l’Europe des ethnies » par Pierre Hillard, Voltaire, 24 octobre 2002.

[2] Le Monde du 10 juin 2004. Article de Martine Silber

[3] Ibid.

[4] L’intégralité du plan Ibarretxe est disponible sur : www.nuevoestatutodeeuskadi.net/docs/estatuvasco_fr.pdfVoir aussi : Déclaration institutionnelle du président Ibarretxe (en particulier la composition du gouvernement de coalition basque. Deux partis sur trois, le PNV et Eusko Alkartasuna, sont membres des Verts/ALE) :www.nuevoestatutodeeuskadi.net/docs/declaracion25-10-2003_fr.pdf
La France avec le pays basque français est concernée par le plan Ibarretxe. Le préambule de ce plan stipule en particulier : « Le peuple basque ou Euskal Herria est un peuple avec une identité propre au sein de l’ensemble des peuples d’Europe, dépositaire d’un patrimoine historique, social et culturel singulier, qui s’étend géographiquement sur sept Territoires actuellement articulés en trois domaines juridiques et politiques différents et qui se répartissent sur deux Etats (ndlr : souligné par nous) (…). L’exercice du droit du peuple basque à décider de son propre avenir se matérialise depuis le respect au droit des citoyens des différents espaces juridiques et politiques dans lesquels ce droit s’articule actuellement à être consultés pour décider de leur propre avenir. C’est-à-dire en respectant la décision des citoyens de l’actuelle Communauté Autonome basque, la décision des citoyens de la Communauté de Navarre, ainsi que celle des citoyens des territoires basques du Pays basque français – Iparralde - : le Labour, la Basse Navarre et la Soule.

[5] www.greens-efa.org/fr/press/...

[6] www.greens-efa.org/fr/press/...

[7] www.greens-efa.org/pdf/docum...

[8] « Grüne schaffen in Rom gemeinsame europäische Partei » par Paul Badde, Die Welt, 21 février 2004.

[9] « Unter deutscher Führung : die Grünen des Kontinents » par Konral Schuller, Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagszeitung du 22 février 2004.

[10] Voir notre ouvrage Minorités et régionalismes dans l’Europe fédérale des régions, éditions François-Xavier de Guibert, pp. 149, 155, 183 et 184.

[11] Membres des Verts/Alliance Libre Européenne en 2004 : Bloque Nacionalista Galego (BNG), Chunta Aragonesista, Esquerra Republicana de Catalunya (ERC), Eusko Alkartasuna (EA), Fryske Nasjonale Partij, Liberta Emiliana-Nazione Emilia, Liga Fronte Veneto, Ligue savoisienne (qui a participé au congrès de l’UFCE à Haderslev en 1999), Lithuanian Polish People’s Party, Mebbyon Kernow, Mouvement Région Savoie, Partei der Deutschsprachigen Belgier, Partido Andalucista, Parti Occitan, Partito Sardo d’Azione, Partitu di a Nazione Corsa, Plaid Cymru (Party of Wales), Rainbow-Vinozhito, Scottish National Party (SNP), Silesian Autonomy Movement, Slovenska Skupnost Spirit, Union démocratique bretonne, Union du Peuple alsacien, Union für Südtirol, Union Valdôtaine, Unitat Catalana.
Observateurs : Hungarian Federalist Party, Moravian Democratic Party, Partido Nacionalista Vasco, Parti Socialista de Mallorca i Menorca-Entesa Nacionalista, Transilvanian Party.

[12] Voir notre ouvrage Minorités et régionalismes dans l’Europe fédérale des régions, p. 242.

[13] On peut constater que ces trois ensembles correspondent aux frontières de la grande Hongrie durant la seconde guerre mondiale.

[14] Diplomatie Magazine, mars-avril 2003 – n°2, p. 61.

[15] www.raslaska.org/ras/pol/ind...

[16] www.fuen.org/pages/deutsch/d..., Pressemitteilung 2004 – 29.

[17] www.fuen.org/pages/deutsch/d..., Präsidium, liste de l’équipe dirigeante de l’UFCE en 2004.

[18] Ibid., Ordentliche Mitglieder et www.florina.org

[19] www.fuen.org/pages/deusch/d_..., Pressemitteilung 2004 - 31 : Kongress des European Free Alliance – Rainbow party, Konferenz am 30. Mai 2004 in Thessaloniki/Solun, FUEN (ndlr : UFCE) wird von Bela Tonkovic vertreten.

[20] www.fuen.org/pdfs/19980524Do...

[21] www.plaidcymru.org/press0310...

[22] www.fuen.org/pdfs/20030908DO...

[23] www.ecmi.de/doc/about_staff.html

[24] Statutes of the Foundation « European Centre for Minorities Issues », Flensburg, Editions ECMI, 29 janvier 1998, p. 9.

[25] www.ecmi.de/doc/about_staff.html

[26] www.fuen.org/pages/deutsch/d..., Pressemitteilung 2004 – 17.

[27] www.eurac.edu/Org/Minorities..., liste des signataires à la fin de la Déclaration de Bozen.

[28] www.eurac.edu/About/history_...

[29] www.eurac.edu/Org/Minorities... On peut y lire le curriculum vitae des participants dont ceux de Rainer Hoffmann et de Marc Weller.

[30] www.welcomeurope.com/news_in...

[31] www.fuen.org/pdfs/20030908DO.... On trouve parmi les participants au Congrès de l’UFCE en 2003 : Bruno Hosp (membre actif au sein de l’Assemblée des Régions d’Europe, ARE), Ulrich Bohner (membre dirigeant du Congrès des Pouvoirs Locaux et Régionaux d’Europe, CPLRE), mais aussi John Packer (OSCE), Gabriel von Toggenburg (EURAC) ou encore Jochen Welt, haut fonctionnaire au sein du gouvernement allemand chargé de l’intégration en Allemagne des réfugiés germaniques originaires d’Europe centrale et orientale ainsi que de la conservation des minorités allemandes dans tout l’est européen.

[32] Europa Ethnica, éditions Braumüller, prologue. Dans la liste des éditeurs de cette revue, nous trouvons aussi Rainer Hoffmann dont le rôle au sein des instances européennes est incontournable.

[33] Voir notre ouvrage Minorités et régionalismes dans l’Europe fédérale des régions, p. 188

[34] www.eurac.edu/Org/Minorities... (avec liste des contributions).

[35] www.ecmi.de/doc/about_board.html Il faut souligner aussi la présence au sein de l’ECMI du haut fonctionnaire au ministère de l’Intérieur allemand, Detlev Rein, agent de liaison avec l’UFCE. Voir note de bas de page numéro 16.

[36] www.auswaertiges-amt.de/www/...Le comité consultatif en charge de vérifier la bonne application de la convention-cadre pour la protection des minorités a été remanié. Depuis juin 2004, Rainer Hoffmann n’est plus président.

[37] « George Soros, spéculateur et philantrope », Voltaire, 15 janvier 2004.

[38] www.eurac.edu/Org/Minorities...

[39] www.coe.int, rubrique Droits de l’homme, section minorités nationales.

[40] « La Fondation Carnegie pour la paix internationale », Voltaire, 25 août 2004.

[41] « LafondationFord,paravent philantropique de la CIA » et « Pourquoi la Fondation Ford subventionne la contestation »par Paul Labarique, Voltaire, 5 et 19 avril 2004.

[42] www.per-usa.org/brochure.htm

[43] www.greens-efa.org/pdf/docum..., p. 6.

[44] www.greens-efa.org/pdf/docum..., p. 12.

 

www.ukip.org

...................................................
Main Page Archive