Concern, is at least the adjective, which can be associated with the institutional situation being experienced by Italy. The apparent breakdown of Italian democracy, we must view with concern, not only as a country representative in Europe, if not by the wave that would trigger both political union like the EU's economic, institutional collapse of his political system.
And is that the risk of a new Tangentópolis, as party politics ended with the former led by the DC and PSI, and that led to the Berlusconimanía (about Forza Italia), not to mention the invention of Padania (very spurred by the state's institutional failure and political opportunism and populism of the Lega Nord) and the remaking of the PCI in what is called the Olive Tree. This gives apparent signs of being very close to happen again.
And this from happening again, with the apparent feeling that the division of power in Italy is fading, not to mention that the 4th power is in the hands of Power, read Silvio Berlusconi, and this is very dangerous for Italy and for Europe.
Not only for the "values? Representing the host of the Palazzo Chigi, if not for the social breakdown that is causing the Italian citizens differentiate between fans and foes, and this is truly dangerous.
But fortunately Italian society reacts, since threatened the country's institutional reputation and currently is building a movement covered in Facebook, called the Popolo Viola (Violet Town). On this day, are already more than 230,000 followers who seconded the motion. Movement that articulates the needs of political expression, of a citizenry that feels abandoned by their public representatives, is not really articulated a political opposition that would confront the excesses of Il Cavaliere. This wave of hope born citizen last December and took the body (ie media outreach) where members have been activated since 5 March to protest in the street against the attempt at "rigging" of the Italian government by decree " save it "favoring the LDP, quashing the decision of the judges.
I wonder what Europe would have said if this had happened in a country in the sphere of influence of the EU, declarations and appeals to respect the constitutional environment had been vociferous. But this does not apply to Italy, and the worst is that it is an example for others to follow this (hopefully wrong). The EU institutional channels and especially the European Parliament, should be the guarantors of our rights as citizens, regardless of balance or individual forces within the Union.
Only then will feel that we are building a Europe of Citizens.
In Italy, a citizens' movement is born free and not tied to old dogmas of the Italian institutional power (political parties and church). After the green revolution Iranian, live birth violet citizen movement, the dream of a group of citizens in defense of democracy and thanks to 2.0 channels. ... We are expectant

Concern, surely the situation is extremely worrying. They found out Mr. Van Rompuy and Mrs. Ashton who has entered into force a new treaty in Lisbon, which attempts to give the EU institutions a greater capacity for action greater policy coherence. Have you heard Mr. President, you have to start managing a broad political agenda and who has to be the visible head of government action in the EU, ahead of President of the Commission and the Council's rotating President . The answer is obvious: no. It is easier not to get the monkey of slaughter and watch the show from a comfortable seat.
But the worst is in the deep apathy of Ms. Ashton facing the new EU mechanisms, especially the most relevant to the Union's external action: The service European External Action Service (EEAS). And is that besides apathy, joins two other epithets: paralysis and nepotism. The SEAE institutionally paralyzed by the inane actions of the EU High Representative for Foreign and Security Policy and Vice President. Honestly, I did not like his appointment. Of all the myriad of nations comprising the EU, I think that is a prefix to institutional irresponsailidad this strategic institutional piece, a citizen of one of the most belligerent nations against the EU's external action, especially as the historic alignment UK in this aspect has been to be the faithful squire of the USA. and also be the constant drag to move towards Euroarmy, given his strong convictions to continue to support the NATO force structure. Recall further that Ms. Alshton has been lacking in certain events marking the European institutional character, being subordinated to the needs of British parliamentarism agenda (Weird coincidences, by Jove! "), As in the commemoration of the launch of the new institutional framework.
However, I must admit that from the beginning of his appointment, I bet for giving him a chance. Not for nothing is one of the most pro-European British citizen we know, although the adjectives mention "Europe" and "British" attached to the concept of citizen make an oxymoron in itself, or at least that we have been detecting those we complain about the exasperating slowness of the functioning of European institutions since last ampiación.
However the figures speak for themselves. The SEAE not progressing quickly it should, and Van Rompuy "The Absent" is alien to this important deployment in Europe in the world. It is a historic opportunity to provide the Union with a foreign power and unprecedented presence, especially in times of international unrest that we are living.
Moreover, the process of selecting the 30 Headquarters of Delegation is being led directly by it, without the necessary transparency in the process of selecting personnel who will be the Union's image outside our borders. The most flagrant case of the Head of Delegation for the U.S. which has been given a finger to the outgoing Chief of Staff to the President of the Commission, in a blatant case of nepotism. By the way, where are the permanent delegations of Member States, where are the Foreign Ministers and the Parliament will not say anything, not only by the selection procedure described above, if not for the clumsiness and inefficiency in the deployment of Foreign Service.
Above all this, I recommend reading the entry of Andrés Laguna, diplomatic asset, FP has published on his blog in the Shadow Presidency.
Mr. Van Rompuy start doing their work, Ms. Ashton come back to the City, this position is too big and what's worse, I sincerely believe that their mission, personal or collective, is not aligned with the objectives of the Lisbon Treaty.

I just read the book by George Friedman, "The Next 100 Years", and I must admit that far from creating me an expectation sense of what may bring this century that we have come a turbulent first decade, has achieved the opposite: I have made it quite cold. In establishing the geopolitical foundations according to its author, will be key in the next 90 years if it is true that the author acknowledges that some future projections are based on the fact expect the unexpected, something that has been constant in the future of humanity, especially in the contemporary history is concerned. Suffice it to observe the trajectory of the twentieth century. If we divide it into 5 parts, each 20 years nobody would have known what would venture to happen in the next two decades.
But apart from sharing with the author that the U.S. will remain the dominant power this century, there is certainly obviated visions very concrete realities and settled on the international scene, which in my view at all correspond to projections future, rather, I believe, are about "wishes" for not saying "run notes" for future White House occupants, particularly those of a political tendency.
But before we make a point about who is George Friedman, or rather who is behind this Doctor from Cornell University in Political Science. The Jewish Holocaust survivor of Hungarian origin, had the luck to start a new life in the U.S., and surely this has shaped the vision of their political mind, he founded the Center for Geopolitical Studies at Louisiana State University (curious place to implement a project of this nature, away from Washington), but now runs the company called Stratfor Global Intelligence, a think tank specializing in strategic geopolitical forecasts (and hence what Stratfor = Strategic Forecast).
This company created in 1996 by Mr. Friedman, has become a specialist company in geopolitics also have a public viewing (many of their analysts are commentators and columnists at the BBC, Fox News, The Economist, etc.. ), has a vision of an institution linked to certain lobbies the Republican Party, and is a company closely linked to the CIA (this is nothing new in U.S., many think tanks are common suppliers reporting and analysis, not only the CIA but from other agencies). But this fact is undoubtedly very transcendent over the pages of the book, that far from being an intuition of how it will be the future, I think it describes the intentions "Imperial" (and legitimate from the point of view U.S. geostrategic.) medium-term, giving clues as to where they need to go in the footsteps of future Republican administrations (this is a deduction of whom you write). The style is the same as always, develop the economy and society for war. The War as "sacrosanct" Grail which generates wealth and social progress, economic and industrial. This is a kind of psalm is repeated throughout the pages, especially when describing the Space War by mid-century, against the Turkish-Japanese coalition. China, what will remain of the current, will be with the Americans and Russia will have disappeared from the international scene, totally dismembered and decomposed.
But where does Europe in the XXI century? According Friedman anywhere. Moreover not a single mention of the European Union, as if the EU is not existent, not a tangible reality in the international community. In fact speaking of Germany and France as countries dying on the UK, they are no comments. Yes, you're right, it is the easternmost U.S. territory completely folded to U.S. imperial desires and without any major role in the international arena. Of course the true and only European power in this century will be: Poland!, A paranoid Poland with Germany and waiting for the rematch with Russia, in line with Hungary and Romania. And the bad of the function is Turkey, which is the only world power in the Muslim world, not Islamic extremists, but with its Ottoman past in tow.
This is what I described briefly. The EU does not exist, we are irrelevant, in fact as he describes the future evolution of the century, at the moment the EU is already irrelevant and the weight of Europe exist.
What can you conclude from this? For me it is transparent. T he European political system is going to build new bridges of permanent international cooperation between states, mixing economic, political and social sectors, unnerving to some U.S. politicians. At the end of the "neocon" and supporters of the "Tea Parties", just understand the speech of arms, as they have been describing mandate after mandate.
The question, of concern, is whether this is just the isolated opinion of an ultra-conservative sect of the GOP, or if instead it is already widespread doctrine of some agencies and conservative think tanks, or in the worst case, this type No opinion on the Future of Europe is already incorporated in the strategic studies centers of the armed forces of the United States.
The answer is quite clear, we need more Europe, we must move forward and now the priority is economic union and not just monetary, not to mention Europe's diplomatic strategy, p ut this will be the next post ...

Two apparently different issues, have made me rethink the usual consideration that the human race is ready to repeat history everlastingly at some point in its evolution.
This week, we saw how the Obama administration in the White House received a Dalai Lama, reincarnated in the shape of the Tibetan resistance against the Chinese regime's repression. Indeed, such a meeting took place in the wing S maps and not in the Oval Office, and both received the Lama, as his departure was made by the "back door" of the Presidential Building. And is that times are not precisely coordinated chosen with the needs of the U.S. international agenda it is setting.
Time, which pass through the need for Chinese vote in the Security Council of the UN to impose sanctions that the international community wants to require the system of "atomic ayatollahs" of Iran. Recall that the tyrannical Iranian regime can be a major destabilizing its geostrategic hinterland, since his once powerful enemy in Iraq is broken and you can fully engage with all their might to intimidate Israel.
At this point, is when the role of China, will play importance in the future. If you want to be a great power, or rather, the great power of the XXI century, can not limit his game to be the counterbalance to the U.S., especially where there are regional powers with commercial and other types of influence in the multipolar stage taking place in international actions. This goes through a comprehensive understanding of what happened in the last century, and especially in the last two decades of the Cold War. The USSR as a counter took action and became counterproductive directions, taking a peak at what today we call the Afghan Lesson (same in the U.S. and Europe are backsliding and I fear we are doomed to repeat) .
China has to fit its international strategy, not on their disagreements with the West, but to align with other OECD countries, their natural market. I understand that play to the strategy of world domination, but that dominance is exercised by today's financial markets, not governments. And China has to understand that Al Qaeda and other extremists are SA as his natural enemies, and the rest of the West. Despite their interest to settle in the West where he tries (or does so through third parties), are precisely those places where it should be more present Afghan lessons, especially in some African countries where China has made a great landing.
While China and the U.S., they play their roles geostrategic on ya, nineteenth, and outdated Security Council board of the UN, but in fact their economies are too intertwined and ensures Basterra FG to break bilateral relations, another lesson from the past is gaining momentum and I worry too much.
This weekend in Washington DC, it celebrates the annual meeting of the CPAC (Conservative Political Action Conference), or what is the same as the largest gathering of the extreme right in Western democracies is tolerated, something unthinkable in Europe, not only has naturalized in the U.S., it's about a strategy meeting in which they are defining strategies to take control of the GOP (Republican Party) to gain power in the U.S. This is not a simple collection of admirers of Reagan and Bush Jr. We're talking about a meeting from the meetings of the Tea Party, you are defining a policy basis and excluding simple: We combined a hatred of "apparatus" of State and the Presidency of Obama.
This base their entire ideology on one basic principle: "Our rights do not emanate from the state, came from God," we, like Ahmadinejad in Iran calls when calls to jihad. Obama accused the government of "hiding files to the population" at precisely the forum where Dick Cheney, a character who has made secrecy, lying and hiding their hallmark. But also say they will fight against "tyranny" of Washington, or what is the same against the federal government (and therefore against the government's tax collection) and the "war against illegal immigration" (or what is the same: l to war against "unknown" someone is to blame for the crisis tangible suffer from). Nada say against large oligopolies, large companies or the financial system that caused them to lose their savings or their homes . How will rebel against their "God": capitalism.
But my fear, and even knowing that in present circumstances no longer a clear exaggeration, comes from the lessons of the past. It was the fear, economic recession and the feeling of losing (in the U.S. there after 11-S, have met the enemy, nor have they overcome fear and rising daily), which in the 30s the last century, led to a right-wing populist to power through the ballot box and the support of oligopolies and certain media, then came the coup and the worst war mankind has experienced.
Of course what they say is an exaggeration, but in this era of political correctness, democracies are not structured systems to purge the extremists out of them, and I worry excessively the possibility of a White House in the hands of a Republican Party took by the extreme right, with an undemocratic China and erratic in its international commitments, a Russia that NATO sees as its main enemy, with only formal democracy, a nuclear Iran and some regional powers with authoritarian tendencies.
In the end we miss the Cold War or, hopefully, find a balance in which to correct these imbalances and regional politicians.
If you're still not clear what role the European Union must play in the next decade, then I hope I have cleared any doubt with these thoughts, which I hope is very wrong, about the possibilities it offers.

That's the amount of $ 123 billion, which the Nobel Prize in Economics 1993, Robert Fogel, estimates that China's economy will generate in 2040. Those 86 billion euros represent three times!! The volume of the total economy of the planet in 2000.
If China doubled its per capita income in less than a decade between 1996 and 2005, projections for this year are incredible: as calculated by Fogel, China will achieve in that year an income per capita of 85,000 U.S. dollars, more than double the planned for the entire European Union and well above forecasts for India and Japan.
That is, the beginning of the decade, China will be a poor country to a country "super rich" and what is more, s or GDP is the 40% of the total that will be generated worldwide, compared with 14% of U.S.. and 5% of the EU (yes, you read, only 5%).
Well, we're talking about economic forecasts and economists have shown the end of this decade that are not exactly what his long-term projections. Nobody could watch or warning, the Great Recession of the planet is living in the moment, the result of highly volatile financial markets and speculative. Question I moved the idea that economists are excellent historians, but lousy gurus of the future.
But still, what moves me the thesis of Professor foge l is a great concern. In China, a nation with a long tradition of economic policy planning, with the coercive system of aggressive capitalism, pursued under the aegis of a single party Marxist ideology (based on founding at least), are seriously prepared to plan jumps generations (Legacy of the Leap Forward of Mao Zedong). It's what you govern when not submit to the will of the people that, and confuccionista tradition of imitating the teacher, that is copied to learn, and that carries a great saving of effort in R & D. What make the effort?, when you can copy and replicate it, or rather inexpensive licensing of technology transfer, since the pie is so large that the potential Chinese market (Ask about this, both the Airbus Consortium, like Boeing).
That said, the question is: Are we Europeans prepared to give a response to the emerging powers, especially China? For now, I'm afraid I have to be pessimistic, the answer is no.
No, because we have failed in the Lisbon strategy for this decade is finished. No, because now there is no unanimous answer of the European institutions and especially the governments of member states to fit a clear and concise agenda concrete results at the mercy of the Strategy 2020. And we are losing competitiveness in leaps and bounds.
Still, we need optimism. The EU has a historic opportunity with the new Treaty and new institutional instruments with which it has set for this occasion, reinforcing the role of the European parliament and the appointment of an EU President and Head of Foreign Policy to be supported by a diplomatic service created especially for, and historical too, is the opportunity for States to work together from each of its national responsibility to address this crisis, make the necessary structural changes in each member state, which allow the survival of a model social welfare state and, based on Innovation and Sustainability. This is the model and not another, is the model to the "European" model versus the "Chinese", which will always be at the expense of the vast majority of the population.
China now has 1,200 million inhabitants, if China were to have 25% of the European middle class, would be greater than the U.S. population but it would certainly be at the expense of the other 75%, and that model does not fit within the parameters of western social and political.
This suggest two things: first it is necessary to establish a European Pact for maintaining competitiveness and our social models within a pan-European strategy in 2020 and by the need to establish another National Covenants that support both the pan-European perspective, as the national perspective, to help overcome the crisis and plan for long-term economic policy.
The question is, our states are willing to be led by long-term goals rather than political disputes outstanding, for a handful of votes? Here, finally, I am extremely pessimistic and is really what makes me shudder.
Meanwhile China wakes, as noted in 1975, Alain Peyrefitte ...