Second principle: the control of economic interdependence. There are three aspects to this in the Community. First of all there is competition, which stimulates: the approach of the single market, to which firms have reacted well in advance, has revived national economies which were in relative decline; mentalities are changing, the stage is set for keener competition, a more open attitude to the outside world.
Then there is cooperation, which strengthens: examples are research policy, which should be closer to our firms, training and redeployment in industries faced with far-reaching change, and the development of infrastructure networks.
Finally there is solidarity, which brings us closer together: this is embodied in the policy of economic and social cohesion, which is designed to give each region a real chance and sets us on a growth path which will be beneficial to all. Competition, cooperation, solidarity: these are the three inseparable aspects of the organization of Europe, the management of interdependence in this continent of ours. In other words, a positive-sum game.
- Os governos pouco têm a dizer, implementam este pensamento solidário usando para isso a sua máquina estatal mas também e o mais importante, usam as fundações que financiam conseguindo assim penetrar mais facilmente no tecido social de modo a alterar as percepções de uma sociedade sobre um determinado assunto.
Third principle: the importance of the law, which ensures that the rules are accepted by all the players, so avoiding diktats and the domination of one state over the others. Each member country, whatever its size or strength, can say its piece and make its contribution to the common venture.
Finally, the fourth principle: the need for an effective decision-making process.This is because, without strong institutions, the will to cooperate is by itself not sufficient: the institutional set-up must be such that we are forced to achieve results, i.e. to take decisions and act.
To my mind the authors of the Treaty of Rome made a fundamental innovation in giving the Community a memory enabling it to act and a decision-making system enabling it to go beyond the limits so often encountered by conventional international organizations.
But can these four principles, which make for the solidity of the European Community, be transposed for the construction of a world order?
My answer is "Yes, but". Yes, because in economic and monetary matters the order created is infinitely more stable internally than what went before.Yes, because the discipline deriving from common rules is gradually penetrating our countries, and that is the sine qua non of fruitful cooperation.
But the set-up cannot be transposed as it is. First of all because the differences between levels of development are enormous. And then because civilizations, our conceptions of man, nature, society and even democracy itself, are very different. In the Community we have a great deal in common on these points.
- Como descrevi atrás, todas estas diferenças precisam de ser reduzidas de modo a sentirmos que estamos todos mais ou menos nivelados , claro que o dinheiro não entra neste esquema pois essa é a forma dissimulada de a elite ter sob controlo quem ouse desafiar este totalitarismo.
But this is not true everywhere on our planet, if only because democracy is still far from being the ruling principle for everybody. And finally because giving birth to institutions to which sovereignty is to be transferred and which are to be given power to manage cooperation and settle disputes is a slow and arduous process.
- Delors neste parágrafo diz-nos para que serve a democracia, com tudo o que escreveu atrás neste texto não é difícil de perceber...pois não? É uma ferramenta nada mais, assim como a ditadura, não é a evolução final de uma sociedade, pois apesar de se conhecer o termo e a sua primitiva forma de implementação, só foi aplicada na Europa há pouco tempo, isto tendo em conta é claro as centenas de anos que os países europeus têm nas "pernas".
To convince ourselves of this we have only to think back to the woes of the League of Nations, whose failure so marked Jean Monnet, or to measure the progress made in recent years by the United Nations; but let us not forget the obstacles still lying in its path.
The contribution that the Community as such can make to the new world order can, to use an image from the plant world, be considered something of a hybrid, what is produced by crossing a world power with an international organization. I have been struck by the gradual emergence of the Community in this dual role on the international stage.
First it is an entity which is gradually equipping itself with the means of influencing world affairs, commensurate with what unites us and the essential common interests of the Member States. I do not doubt that the Community will thus be contributing to a more stable and more equitable world order, as is testified by the declarations which the Community signed jointly with the United States in 1990 and with Japan in 1991.
It is also a mediator and arbitrator, when you think of the upheavals in Central and Eastern Europe and the Community's role in the Yugoslav conflict - our observers on the spot and our presence at the peace conference today alongside the United Nations in Geneva. There is also a support function, when you consider the interlinking of the Community's humanitarian aid operations with those of non-governmental organizations and UN agencies.
This is a new departure which is worth thinking about for the future, and it raises a new question: where do the rights and duties of "interference" start and finish? The Community is perhaps in a better position than others to give an unbiased answer to this question.The conclusion, Your Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen, is that the Community's contribution to a new world order is, like the Community itself, something original: a method which will serve as a reference, a body whose presence will be felt.
Este é um texto para se ler muitas vezes porque descreve-nos com precisão o que passado 2 décadas estamos a viver, transição é a palavra mágica, tal como num laboratório a constante mutação acontece até se obter o resultado final desejável da experiência.
Aprende-se mais com Delors nesta ocasião do que a ouvir o zum zum dos media ou a escutar os servos de São Bento/politburo europeu a pregarem maravilhas sobre a EUSSR.
São duas realidades bastante distintas sobre o mesmo corpo, sobre a mesma experiência. Tal como Machiaveli escreveu há mais de 400 anos, têm de existir sempre duas versões sobre o mesmo facto, uma formal e outra informal. Temos a sopa que se dá aos pobres e depois temos a verdade tão bem ilustrada nestes 4 capítulos pelo senhor Maastricht.