Tuesday 11 December 2012

A golden dawn for the EU?

Mediterranean front of the EU


Benidorm (Spain) in the 1960s and today. Comment by Sarah



The contrast between the two pictures of Benidorm is quite shocking considering the fact that only fifty years separate them…
In the last few years, Benidorm has become one of the most visited cities in Spain with an enormous affluence of tourists because of its beaches and weather which is basically sunny all year long. This factor has contributed to the mass construction of skyscrapers, apartments, hotels and other places where tourists can stay during their vacations. The city has had huge economic growth since the 1960s.
Nevertheless, all this has had an impact on the natural environment because, even though there are still trees, there is not as much vegetation as before and it has caused visual pollution; the view of the coastline has been somewhat spoilt.

Tuesday 4 December 2012

Europe is (also) made by great men and women!




Which historic European figure do you most admire and why?

Which European personality (in any field, including politics, economics, education, sciences, sports, the arts, charity work, etc.) do you most admire and why?

Tuesday 27 November 2012

Eurogroup deal means a brighter future for Greece?

Watch the BBC News video!

Questions:

  1. What is the Eurogroup, what is the IMF?
  2. What is the nature of the "deal"?
  3. Why is the agreement not "just about money"?
  4. How will it help Greece?
  5. What has Greece "demonstrated" according to Lagarde of the IMF?
  6. Why is Stournaras happy?
  7. What is the "social state" of Greece like?
  8. What is the journalist talking about when he mentions "an extremely difficult balancing act"?
  9. What do YOU think of the training project by the National Opera?
  10. What are your ideas to help Greece avoid complete economic and social collapse?

Sunday 14 October 2012

How should the EU react to the situation in Syria?

EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy
BBC News articles on the Syrian conflict
Guardian articles on Syria


Laura, Pierre, Pamela & Marion :

On the 15th March 2011, an armed conflict began between the Syrian government and opponents to Bashar al-Assad’s dictatoral regime. These protesters want an end to Ba'ath party rule and the resignation of the President.

This conflict is a major problem, but should the European Union get involved in any way in the conflict and why? We think that the European Union should act to put an end to this civil war.

On a world scale, the European Union should act through its representative at the United Nations Security Council in order to convince the major powers to find consensus over this issue. UN measures must be taken as regards Syria. The combined weight of the EU plus the majority of the word’s nations would inevitably lead the Syrian Government to resign… However, we must not forget that Russia and China, being permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, have veto rights. Here are some of the reasons they refuse UN intervention in Syria:
  • because the Russian government is a major provider in weapons for al-Assad’s army (this trade brings Russia much money);
  • since 1971, Russia and Syria have been allies;
  • the only Russian military base in the Mediterranean Sea is in Syria;
  • Russia and China are virtual dictatorships and do not want the revolutionary wave of the Arab Spring to spread to their territory (governments there want to show that their authority cannot be overthrown by anybody, including of course their own people).

A UN resolution on Syria should include a compensation clause for Russia (compensation for loss of trade). Still, this would probably not be enough to make Russia change its mind; other measures need to be considered.

The EU should try to have greater influence impact on Syrian politicians by, for example, sending diplomats to negotiate or by convincing the United Nations that peace keepers to be sent there again.

The Union should ask for donations from the European population to support the humanitarian efforts of organizations like ECHO.

Furthermore, European representatives are not the only ones who are going to influence the final decision of the European Union. Through social networks such as Twitter or Facebook we, European citizens, can give media coverage and put pressure on European Union institutions in order to force them to act wisely and quickly…



Charles, Gabriel, Blandine & Marie :

The Syrian Civil war, opposing Bashar al-Assad and armed rebel groups (the Syrian National Council and the Free Syrian Army), has caused at least 30,000 deaths since March 2011. Staying neutral would be against the Charter of fundamental rights of the European Union, because of the massive killings either by government or by terrorist actions in Syria. The EU has the right and duty to act in world affairs and uses diplomacy to resolve conflicts and also peacekeeping missions to send observers and provide humanitarian aid to people displaced by fighting.

How can the EU react to the killing of so many innocent people in this conflict?

Up to this point, the EU has not risked taking the conflict to a higher level by sending armed forces to Syria. Its economic sanctions (for example, the freezing of assets of two Syrian companies supporting the dictatorship with a chemical weapons program) have not been efficient.  The UN calls for a cease-fire in March and May 2012 have also failed. We think that the EU should put pressure on the UN and promote the idea of sending an international peace-keeping force to Syria.

The rising violence is drawing inevitably the EU and other Western powers ever-closer to direct involvement in a bloody conflict. The Syrian National Council is asking for more robust support such as establishing safe havens for refugees protected by Western forces, arming and equipping the Free Syrian Army, and establishing a
no-fly zone enforced by Western air power. Should the EU should respond favourably  to the FSAs requests? Perhaps not, because Syria is located at the epicentre of inter-Arab and Arab-Israeli politics, meaning that if we get involved in the Syrian civil war, Arab States will also take part, and an escalation of the conflict will be inevitable.


Any armed intervention by the EU or by particular Member States of the EU in the Syrian conflict would not have UN approval since Russia and China have vetoed any intervention at the UN Security Council. Russia and China have close economic and military ties with the al-Assad regime, and as permanent members of the Security Council they have therefore vetoed three Western-backed resolutions aimed at isolating the al-Assad regime and will also veto the demand to send military forces to Syria. Russia is Bashar al-Assads only source of weapons; if we were to cut off that source, the civil war would inevitably come to an end and let negotiations commence. But the EU relies on Russias gas and energy, so it cannot clearly oppose itself to Russia. And Russia has the worlds second most powerful military force…

We come to the conclusion that the EU must keep its boycotts and arms embargo on Syria to weaken the countrys economy and army, but, more efficiently, the EU should, with other powers, put pressure on Russia to make it change its position. How about imposing economic sanctions on Russia?


Cyprien, Sarah, Viktoria, Alexane & Marine:

The crisis in Syria, opposing dictator Bashar al Assad to the people in revolt, is getting worse every day. Thousands of innocent people, including women and children, die every day fighting for freedom from oppression.

The European Union should react. The longer we wait, the more difficult it will be to find solutions to this catastrophic war. Europe is one of the biggest economic forces in the world and it should use its influence in order to intervene in this conflict which is slowly becoming worldwide. In fact, uprisings have already begun in Turkey (which is a country that Europe needs because of its young workforce). The EU has already tried to put a stop to the fighting by implementing sanctions but these have been inefficient.

The EU could send  more humanitarian help, especially for the youth because they are the generation that could change the political situation in Syria as soon as the war is over.

It would be a major step if all countries in the UN came to a common agreement on how they should deal with Syria. However, Russia and China are obstructing the process because of their economic interests. Therefore, it is important for the EU to try to negotiate with these countries in an efficient way so that the UN could be united and stop the war in Syria.

Finally, another method that could be used is to overthrow the dictator Bashar al Assad. This would be a quick way to end the crisis…

Once the civil war is over, it is important that the EU help the new country to set up a stable democracy because if the new leader is a religious extremist then Syria will be right back to where it started.


Leo, Justine, Noemie & Jonathan:


The sheer number of casualties in the Syrian conflict has made people from around the world meditate about a possible way to end as soon as possible this terrible event...


After reaching a dead-end at the United Nations meeting (due to Russian support of the Bashar al-Assad regime, and their ability to veto any proposition reached there), the European Union decided to take matters into their own hands and came up with a list of sanctions in response to the ever-increasing violence in Syria. However, this has been inefficient due to the fact that the Syrian Government still has support from Russia, and is as a result hardly affected by the European embargo.

Even though some politicians argue that, like most “Arab Spring” nations, Syria will not become more democratic but will end up being ruled by violent parties like the Muslim Brothers, we still have to find a way to put an end to all of these massacres…


How can the EU help the Syrian people? Firstly it could send more humanitarian aid there. Also, it should find a way to protect at least the children from being hurt by creating more refugee camps (in which they could even go to school). It would be a good idea too to help the Syrian opposition by giving more arms to the resistance fighters so that they could defend themselves better from El Assad’s army. The EU could also accelerate the negotiations by toughening the list of sanctions, or give El-Assad an ultimatum, threatening him with invasion if he doesn't comply with the EU's conditions… One of the most urgent things which should be considered by the EU is without doubt the reaching of an agreement with Russia with the aim of uniting opposition to the Syrian regime.


Evan, Julien, Jacobo, Valentine:

Today in Syria, thousands of people are being tortured and murdered. In March 2011, protests in Syria began in order to overthrow the dictatorial President of this country, Bashar al-Assad. Even though the protests have been going on for a long time, he remains in power because of Russian support for his the army.

The European Union has already taken a few measures against the al-Assad regime but they have not been efficient. The EU has its own security and foreign policies, all based on diplomacy,  diplomacy leading to peace-making... But, in order to stabilize and maintain peace, the European Union needs the resources to intervene such as soldiers or observers which need to be sent for disarmament operations, humanitarian tasks, or military advice. The EU should also be sending aid, to the injured and to try to protect the families and children. Helping the Syrian people overthrow their president would not only be good for the Syrians but also for us.

The disappearances and arbitrary detention of thousands of people are sufficient reason for us to get involved. However, if the EU were to get involved, it would also have to stop Russia from supplying weapons to al-Assad’s army…


Arthur, Alice, Blanche & Augustin:

The Syrian civil war began on 15th March 2011. On that day, demonstrations  were held by Syrian citizens, asking for the resignation of dictator Bashar al-Assad and the end of nearly five decades of Ba’ath Party rule.  These protests came in the wake of the Arab Spring movement. The government, refusing the rebels’ conditions, deployed the army to quell the uprising, ordering soldiers to open fire on rebels and citizens. This lead to a civil war between the government’s forces and the insurgents.

The conflict has now been going on for nearly two years, and, everyday, innocent Syrian citizens are killed.

The position of the EU towards this conflict is complicated, since it doesn’t have a lot of leeway to act. However, would staying neutral not be against the EU’s own Charter of Fundamental Rights? Especially as the Syrian National Council, the main protest organization, is asking for more consistent help from foreign countries.

The simple solution would be a military intervention by the UN. But Russia and China, permanent members of the UN Security Council, have put their veto. This is explained by the fact that China, and especially Russia, are commercial partners of Syria. The conflict is a good thing for Russia, whose trade with Syria also includes weapons!

The EU must try to convince or pressure Russia and China to stop using their veto. However, there is little chance of the EU succeeding in this...

Eventually, another solution would be to just let the insurgents overthrow the current government themselves  and help them by sending them more aid for the injured people. This would also help to avoid worsening the economic situation of Europe with another war.

The EU could even sell weapons with reduced profits margins to insurgents, which would help them and would allow Europe to earn some money (which we really need right now!). As one of the rebels, quoted in the Boston Herald has said:  “We don’t need food. We don’t need money. We need weapons.”

Here is a something to think about : if you see two people fighting inside a house, would you enter the house to intervene?

Comment by Arthur on a photo by Chris Jordan


This photo is of a large book dropped on the ground somewhere. It's in a poor state. It’s a sober photo with few elements, which make those elements all quite important. My first idea was that it somehow symbolized the destruction by the elements of American culture... It contrasts with the idea the world has of the USA as being almost indestructible. I think Jordan wants to show that we are weak compared with the natural forces.

Looking more closely at the picture, we notice that it is in fact a telephone directory. The photo becomes even more tragic, refering to the human loss caused by Katrina. The list of names are a kind of reference to all the deaths caused by the hurricane.

Does the EU deserve to win the Nobel Peace Prize 2012?

Saturday 29 September 2012

Thoughts on a photo of a devastated home by Evan & Marion


This photo shows how destructive Katrina was for all the people who lived on its trajectory. Indeed, what had taken them their whole life to build and improve - their home - suddenly got wrecked in a matter of seconds without any possibility for them to intervene.

This photo shows the vulnerability of human beings, of life, and the fragility of the "material world" we nowadays live in. Here, we realize that even if we have acquired a great level of knowledge, we will always suffer passively from Nature's haphazard violence. It will always be superior to us.

This dramatic event may raise awareness of environmental issues, as the force of hurricanes will probably intensify because of global warming, which we all contribute to. Even though some scientists believe the increase in hurricane frequency is just part of a natural cycle, it is still extremely important to care about the world we live in, as it can only bring positive repercussions on many different aspects.

Loss... Comment by Sarah & Julien on a photo by Chris Jordan


The floor of the emptied room is covered in dried mud. This photo is about the emptiness a person feels when he or she loses everything. The cracks are in a way also the mental scars left by Katrina...

Hurricane Katrina was a natural disaster that occured over a week from August 23 to August 30 in 2005. Winds reached 280km an hour. It formed over the Bahamas and crossed southern Florida, the Gulf of Mexico, southeast Louisiana and Mississippi, Alabama, Cuba and almost all the east coast of the United States. The hurricane caused almost two thousand deaths. It caused beach erosion, local marshes were overrun by water, and it affected the habitats of animals and also caused oil spills.

Reconstruction was costly because infrastructures and forest lands were completely destroyed. Some insurance companies stopped insuring homeowners so people moved to other States. Looting in search of food and water was widespread and there were even some murders, thefts and rapes.
Are we all responsible to some degree for this disaster? Yes, we are, everyone of us, because of our constructions, of our new high tech products, of our industries, the environment is being damaged. Using the car is one of the worst things, and the United States is by far the worst culprit. Climate change is due to all of us and it explains the violence of Katrina.

But can we do something to avoid damaging the environment? Not much, because the electronic objects we use upsets the earth's fragile balance.

If the effects of the hurricane were so devastating it is also because people did not build strong enough houses and because the evacuation plans were not edequate. Maybe too some of the cities that were destroyed were situated too near to a river.

We consider that all our modern conveniences are essential. Disasters like Katrina are the price to pay for progress...

European Charlemagne Youth Prize

Barroso, European Commission President, gives his State of the Union address to the European Parliament, September 2012 (plus discussion on video)

Tuesday 25 September 2012

Lost fridge... by Marie and Alexane


The picture shows a refrigerator on Franklin Avenue. It stands there as if it has always been there. Besides the fridge, the street is completely empty and devastated by the violence of Katrina. The fridge has its door open to show us all the food in it. It is all messed up, fallen down. Still, we recognize some stuff such as milk, eggs, and bottles of coke and beer.

Normally, the fridge is in a house, in an interior, it has no reason to be outside in the street. It shows that Katrina has changed everything; it has devastated and destroyed the city. The violence moved a fridge, which is really heavy, from one place to another. It also shows that people have lost their goods. They no longer have a complete house, any food to eat... They have lost everything in the hurricane. Nature has literally taken the goods and the lives of people. Fridge is the symbol of consumerism; it is as if Nature has taken over society.

We think we are all partly to blame for the Katrina catastrophe. First of all, people have not taken adequate safety measures by building on risk-free areas. The constructors should have made more tests before building there because they knew there was a risk in these areas. The politicians could have taken preventative measures such as strengthening the dike protecting the city from floods due to hurricanes, creating an evacuation plan for the population, and the construction of buildings adapted to the natural risks on this specific zone. However, the authorities have not provided a sufficient budget to set up these measures and thereby failed to limit the risks associated with this catastrophe. Another reason may have been that the population was not even aware of the risks. Authorities should have set up simulation exercises so that people would have known how to react in case of a natural disaster, or the students should have received some sort of training in school to be informed and know what to do in case of a hurricane.

After the catastrophe, the entire world could have helped by giving money to repair and help the population that had almost lost everything.

The 26th of September every year is European Day of Languages!

Check-out the Council of Europe Web site!
A few ideas to celebrate!

You will find the answers to the following questions in the Council of Europe Web site above!
  1. What is the Council of Europe?
  2. What is "intercultural understanding"?
  3. How many indigenous languages are spoken in Europe?
  4. How is Europe's linguistic heritage described?
  5. Why does the Council of Europe promote the learning of several languages?
  6. On a world scale, is monolingualism the norm?
  7. Where in Europe is plurilingualism a part of everyday life?
  8. How many people claim to be able to converse in English in Europe?
  9. What does "lingua franca" mean?
  10. What is the purpose of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages?
  11. How do you say "Hello! Talk to me!" in at least five European languages?
  12. How many languages are spoken by the 7 billion people of the planet?
  13. Which are the most spoken languages?
  14. What percentage of the world's languages are indigenous to Europe?
  15. What is a "mother tongue"?
  16. Which is the most difficult mother tongue to learn?
  17. What is "language"?
  18. How many sounds does Irish contain?
  19. From how many other languages has English borrowed words?
  20. How many languages are spoken in London?


Here are some questions for you (i.e. give your opinion):
  1. What, in a European Union context, is the purpose of the European Day of Languages (EDL)?
  2. Give five good reasons why people need to learn to speak several languages.
  3. How many languages and regional languages do you speak?
  4. How well do you identify foreign languages?
  5. Which is your "first language" (use the definition in the EDL Website)?
  6. Are there any drawbacks to being able to speak several languages?
  7. Is language learning more a constraint or an opportunity for you?
  8. If you had the time, what languages would you like to learn and why?
  9. Which is your favorite language and why?
  10. What would be a fun way to promote the EDL in Massillon (find a good slogan!)?


Activities:
  1. Enjoy the Facts & Fun activities on the EDL Website!
  2. What word did you add to the "language treasures" database?
  3. Learn to say by heart "Hello! Talk to me!" in as many different languages as you can (cf. video on EDL Website)!

Friday 21 September 2012

Europe? What's it to you?!

What Europe means for ordinary people...

Marion says: What does the European Union mean to me? It gives me a sense of security as it protects me and all European citizens from an eventual war that could happen if the Union did not exist. To me it is a way for countries to unite in order to be stronger and more efficient. The European Union also provides many advantages such as social rights, wherever I decide to live in the Union.

Léo says: For me, the European Union is 27 countries which try to work together. Each country has to give its contribution to make the Union bigger and stronger. The initial idea was to avoid wars in Europe. It is still the case but now the economic aspect has become more and more important. One of the main aims is to have more influence in the world's economy. Sometimes it is also about helping each other. At the moment it is the case for countries like Greece and Spain, and I think that there will be more countries with difficulties. In most of the countries of the European Union we use the same money, the Euro. In my everyday life, I do not "see" the European Union at work, but I am sure that it has an impact on our lives, for example the Schengen Area where passports controls have been abolished. I suppose also that the EU gives subsidies to increase every country's economic potential.

Sarah says: The fact is that, even though I have two different nationalities and I feel both French and Spanish, I do not feel European. It is not because you live somewhere that you have to feel that you are part of it... In fact, Europe is rather an abstract idea for me even if I live within its territory. It is true that we all share some values and, deep down, we want the same things, but I think that calling someone European is generalizing too much as if this "European" person was the same as all the other people who live in Europe, which is just not true. So, if I think of myself as French or as Spanish it is because my parents are French and Spanish and I have been living with these two cultures since I was born. They are both part of my identity and personality.

Arthur says: If someone were to ask me where I was from, I would certainly answer France and not Europe. It is clear that I have stronger patriotic feelings towards my home country than towards the European Union. This feeling is due to the fact that I have know my country, its culture, its language and its inhabitants since childhood. But a feeling of membership to this Union had grown in me over the last few years; indeed, even though I have never lived in a foreign country, the different cultures that I discovered in countries outside of the European continent have made me feel more ‘at home’ while visiting the countries which are members of the Union. Of course, it was fascinating to visit countries such as Marocco or Turkey, but the cultural differences between other countries and those of the European Union clearly creates strong links between the countries of the European Union.

Blandine says: I've never really thought about being European... I actually feel much more French than European. Unlike people living in the United States, who all say proudly they are American, I never had the idea to say that I'm European rather than French. It will perhaps change with time... However, I did experience some of the advantages of being a citizen of the European Union. I lived for five years in Hungary, when some of the countries around it weren't yet part of the European Union, and when we no longer had to spend one or two hours having to cross the boarder lines and move freely it was a great improvement.

Marine says: In my case, I wasn’t born in Europe but I do have a European nationality. My mother is from Holland and my dad is from Belgium; I have the Belgian nationality but I haven’t even lived in that country. I have only lived in foreign countries to which I don’t have family ties but I have been living in Europe for eleven years. I don’t really feel like I have a nationality at all since it’s all mixed up and so I don’t feel European. Whenever someone asks me where I’m from, it is hard for me to reply. I am glad though to be living in Europe since it’s a continent with many advantages such as freedom to travel to the different countries of the European Union. I believe that this Union is what ties us together and helps keep the peace. It is a vital union and I think that each country that is in the European Union should make an effort to try to keep that connection.

Viktoria says: All Europeans live on the same continent and share the same values. I think that it is important to be more open minded. Thanks to trips abroad, we are able to share our languages, cultures and even values. Thus some Europeans speak several languages and even feel attached to different cultures. We could say that some feel more European than others, as the sharing of our identities is vital to the expansion of the European culture. Moreover this sharing of values is the basis of European culture. Personally, I am German but I live in France, so I have the chance to live with two different European cultures and speak both languages. I think that it is a real plus in life, because speaking two different languages is a plus in today’s society as it enables one to discuss with more people, not only in Europe but also around the world. Even though Germany and France are two countries that are neighbors and are economic partners, I do see some differences in terms of culture, in the ways of life and especially school. School in Germany is until 2pm, not 5pm like in France, and the pressure is far less than in France. I went to a Canadian school too; I felt “European” for the first time in my life because I could see and even feel the differences between Canadians and myself. I do feel European more than anything else; however this identity is not the one I would mention when someone asks me about my nationality. Naturally I would answer German.

Pierre says: I'm not used to considering myself as European; I feel more French than European. The only European country I've lived in is France. I do not know any other European country so I do not know if I share the values and practices of the people in them. I've lived in the United States, and, seen from over there, Europe appears to be insignificant. You just never hear about it...

Charles says: I've never really thought deeply about the term "European" and haven't considered myself as such when in fact I am. It's difficult believing that you are European just like people living, for example, in the UK simply because they seem so far away. I believe it comes from the fact that I lived in America, and so haven't always lived with the idea of France being united with other countries of Europe. When I came back to live in France I considered myself as French and haven't linked France with Germany or the UK, etc. I feel like the other countries of Europe are countries far away from France just like the United States.

Alexane says: I do feel European for many reasons. I can move in any country of the Union without feeling that borders exist. I have the feeling that we have the same way of thinking, the same habits, the same values, as if we all came from the same place. The main difference that I feel is that we don’t speak the same language. I feel European because the members of my family do not all come from France. Some of my grandparents are French but the others are German. Still, they live under the same conditions and have the same values. I don’t see differences in their habits coming from their country. So I have some French origins but also some German ones. I feel European because when I read what's happening in the news, I feel that the European countries are linked together. We share more than the same money and economy; we share ideas and thoughts. We try together to get out of our common problems, to help each other, and to advance together. Still, I must admit that I feel more French than European. Though we talk about Europe, we usually talk more about each individual country. Plus, France has a national anthem, a national holiday… These elements are well-known in the country because I think we really want to show our loyalty to our country. I also think Europe will progress. The Union is new and will advance. It will take time for people to accept this concept and to feel European. In a few years, I think people will consider themselves European more than they do today.

Marie says: The European Union is a gathering of European countries. One person does not govern the Union, but an assembly constituted of elected representatives of the 27 countries in the EU. That's why the EU is a democracy. The EU is also a space of "free-exchange": goods can travel easily from one country to another because there are no economic borders within the EU, and because almost every country shares the same currency, the Euro. The European Union was created in the 1950s by six countries: France, Italy, Germany, Luxemburg, Belgium and Holland. Over the years, the number of countries in the EU has increased; nowadays 27 countries form the European Union. I feel European, but a bit more French, maybe because I have never lived anywhere else. However I feel European because of all my trips to EU countries (Germany, Spain, Holland, Italy), and because my parents brought me up with the idea of being French within the European Union. My trips abroad have also helped me be open to other cultures, and this has been enforced by the OIB which has enabled me to understand other cultures and foreign people thanks to the universal language that is English. Feeling European gives me expectations for the future, because of the possibility to work and live abroad, that is why I give particular importance to the learning of languages and to the discovery and understanding of European cultures, to be able later to travel from one European country to another for work or leisure.

Pamela says: I was born in Canada and lived there for four years, then we moved to Singapore where we stayed for five years, and we have lived in France for the last six years. Last year, I became a French national. Whenever someone asks me where I am from, it is difficult for me to say to them that I am from a specific country or continent. My parents were both born in different parts of Egypt and have Armenian and Lebanese origins. However, I also have a little bit of French blood. I am happy to now be part of the EU because it offers us the possibility to travel and work anywhere we want in the European Union. The EU also exists to keep the peace. I think this is very intelligent and that we should keep this Union for as long as possible!

Laura says: In my opinion, being European means having a particular lifestyle and way of thinking. It is about being part of a community and exchanging ideas and things with each other. Our generation is more likely to think and act as Europeans because we were born in the middle of the expansion of Europe. I’ve got some family on the other side of the English Channel and I have even stronger connections with them than with my French family which lives in the neighbourhood. Two years ago, through an exchange with a school in Serbia, we met some wonderful people in the city of Pirot who seemed really glad to welcome us. During our week over there we made friends with the people there and we all had the impression of being part of the same community, and we still keep in touch with each other. This shows that there are no borders through Europe when it’s about relations between people. Moreover I think that there aren’t many differences between their way of living and ours. I notice that nowadays it is as easy to travel in Europe as to travel in France; all we need is an identity card, some money and a toothbrush. I believe in Europe as it encourages the mixing of different traditions and cultures between Europeans countries. I find it very amusing to think that each French person can enjoy a fresh German beer and eat some tapas from Spain while remaining in France... However during my stay in England last year I took a few exams and realized that there is no real equivalent between the diplomas that you take in high schools in Europe. This shows us that even with progress and the development of similar education throughout Europe there is still room for improvement and for new projects. Though the European economy is going through a recession, I think that Europe really has a future and we will be able to overcome our cultural and historical differences.

Julien says: I do feel European but I feel like I'm more French than European because when I was in the US for a year and people would ask me where I was from, I would answer that I was French. I didn't doubt about whether I was French or European, because when I mentioned that I was French I of course also meant that I was European. Abroad, I was proud of my country. I was so glad to leave it, but you quickly realize how great your home country is. I was also able to know what Americans think about France, and I realized the differences between these two countries. I learnt a lot of things about the United States, as I did also about France in fact! Leaving your home country for a while makes you realize so many things, like what culture is, the importance of language and of the people, and so on. Indeed, it's by living in an other country that you finally get another view of the world, and thanks to this experience, I now know that I'm French more than anything else, and I wouldn't see myself having another nationality.

Jonathan says: For me, the European Union is an organization of 27 European countries. Most of them use the same currency: the Euro. It makes it easier to trade or sell within the EU. If you have the nationality of an EU country, you can live anywhere within the EU. It is border free. People can move freely. The countries are united and maintain peace. Countries want to join the Union. There are conditions to be part of it. Every member country participates in the EU's defence. When countries experience difficult situations like an economic crisis, the others try to help out. How European do I feel? To be honest, I don’t really feel European. Being French and American (with Italian origins) is how I think of myself. I haven’t been raised to think of myself as European. This concept is not present enough in our lives. For most Europeans, the EU is just an “idea”. Living in France, I am surrounded by French culture. At home, my American culture is more present. When people in France ask me where I’m from, I usually answer that I’m from the United States. I usually don’t specify that I’m from New York. If an American asks me where I’m from, I’ll say that I’m from from France. I usually don’t say I’m from Europe. I don’t feel European enough, although I am half European. I know that in the United States, Europe is not really mentioned and is not a big part of Americans’ lives. Anything outside the United States doesn’t really affect or concern Americans. I have been raised differently. I live in the European Union and have always lived here. To compare the EU and the United States, we can see that the Europeans share a lot. The EU groups many countries together. Even though they are all united, Europeans don’t actually feel European. It is the same with the US, except it gathers many States. Americans feel American, but don’t share as many values as Europeans. They have different laws in each state. Usually, Europeans will have a tendency to rank their country higher than the EU. Americans will rank their country higher than their State. To conclude, I think the European Union is very important. The gathering of so many countries of different cultures is incredible. Being Europeans, we can travel around Europe and live anywhere in the European Union. The gathering of these countries makes the EU a superpower, just like the US. All of these countries try to work together and share many values. I think we should all make efforts to feel concerned by the EU, and try to see how valuable it is.

Alice says: Europe is a good thing for the 27 members of the Union. But, as a teenager I do not see the difference as regards being in Europe or just in France. The EU maintains peace, freedom to go everywhere, encourages trade and unity. However, even if I am aware that all these notions of unity and equality are very important after two world wars, I do not for al that feel European. I feel a lot more French. It’s my country, it is where I grew up and where all my family is. When I was younger nobody told me I was European. The first time someone asked me if I felt European was my English teacher in 9th grade. She was very surprised that we did not feel European for students who were in the Euro option class. I’ve always known my country as one of the members of the EU but I have never thought of myself as a European. I discussed this topic with my mother and I was quite surprised when she told me that she does not feel European either. I thought that, as she knows the difference between France before and after the creation of the EU that she could maybe feel more European than I do, but she doesn’t. She agrees with Europe benefits but it never changed the way she lives her life. The creation of the EU has had no impact on her life she feels. I think it is for this reason that so many people do not feel European. We all know how good it is to have the EU, but in our daily lives it does not change anything.

Gabriel says: I feel proud being European just as I feel proud being French, but it is like comparing a person's home town with the same person's native country and then asking them which they hold dearest. Even though a rare few might rate their home town above or below their country, most would react the same way as I do stating that one is not the same as the other. Amongst other cities of France, I would defend my own first and foremost. With someone from another Member State of the EU I would patriotically defend France and with other states not belonging to the EU I would boast my country first and then the benefits of the Union. This is why I accept with open arms the European identity. However, it is clear that for the time being, there is still progress to be made before Europeans adopt the US way of thinking which is "I'm American" first and "I'm from Oklahoma" (or any of the other 49 States) second. Various programmes such as the Erasmus programme work actively towards forging a real European identity but it may nonetheless take many more generations for multiculturalism to be dominant in Europe through marriages (to mix up the origins) and through learning about the different cultures and ways of life.


Jacobo says: I don't feel European at all, even though I'm a Spanish person who has lived in France almost all his life. I think I should, though, because it would be necessary... From my time spent in various Asian countries I realized that being part of a continent and an geo-political organization like the EU is important as it facilitates communications and economic exchange between European countries. One of the problems nowadays is that European countries have developed the economic aspect of their union but less the political dimension. Stronger political institutions would be there to regulate economic and social affairs. For instance, European countries should be able to make a real decision regarding the buying of Chinese products. Asian products are much cheaper because there are no rules on the workers' labor conditions and wages. We have to react, not only for European companies but also for Chinese employees' suffering from terrible living and working conditions. If Europe is to make any decision, we must all become true Europeans and make a common choice by creating a real political union similar to a government.

Noémie says: The European Union is a great improvement for Europeans. This Union, which keeps going growing, gives an important economic place to Europe in the world, keeps peace within Europe and opens the Europeans to other cultures, languages and ways of thinking. For me, being European means sharing values (freedom, democracy, peace…). I think that the EU's slogan “United in diversity” is very true. I think this diversity of languages, habits, etc. stops me from considering myself first as European. We do share something but it’s not enough to make me consider myself as part of a “European group”. However, the European Union is very young… Things might change, for example our great-grand parents thought of themselves as Auvergnat or Breton and not really French… Nowadays, there is no real regional identity because most of the people have lived in several regions of France, which makes them feel French, when you ask any French person about his nationality he will first say that he is simply French! The European policy about free boarders surely will help us to feel more European soon? You can go, live and work anywhere in the EU with just an identity card. When you travel in Europe you realize that there is no real difference between places. I have been to Italy, Greece and Germany. I was very exciting and thought that I would directly know when I will was in the “foreign country” yet when I passed the boarder nothing really changed! We have the same money, the same kind of religion. Only the languages and some foreign habits make you realize that you are not in France. So I think of myself as French and I know too that I have the immense advantage of being part of the European Union. To be European means we can learn other languages, to be more open-minded by discovering a new culture, people, countries. Maybe, after living in another European country, I will say that I’m truly European!

Valentine says: The European Union is an alliance of 27 countries from Europe united under various treaties. This Union presents many advantages, for example it prevents war, and the countries support each other economically and socially. In my opinion, these alliances are superficial on a world wide scale, even if each country is watching out for the others, they will always go for what is to their personal advantage... Over 500 million people are by definition European, which means that they have a nationality from one of the 27 Member States. They benefit from the advantages of membership of the European Union (for example: the right to vote in any country that is part of the European Union). But, do all these people really feel European? You don’t need to be European in order to feel like you are. Some factor that could make you feel European are the pride you feel for a European country that may be your own, or even The European Union itself. You might have kept a good memory or feeling while maybe only visiting one of the 27 countries. Maybe you even speak a language from the European Union. In addition to all of this, you might also take an active part in the everyday life of the Union. I speak four of the EU's languages more or less well and I lived for about six years within the European Union; and, even if I do not benefit from any of the personal advantages, I partly feel linked to the Union and feel European.

Evan says: As an American coming to France through AFS, the question of how European I am isn’t very relevant! But one of the many goals of a student on exchange is to merge into the culture, not simply learn the language and try the food. Of the many buzzwords they kept throwing around at the Parisian orientations, “assimilate” was the one that stuck out the most. The idea of AFS is to grab hold of another culture... However, I’ve only been here for a month. I don’t feel European or French, not yet anyway! If nationality is solely defined by the place you were born, then I’m American. However, nationality is normally defined as more than that. If nationality is culture, tradition, and values, then I have very little idea who I am. People in general are pretty much the same as they are in the US. People think the same and value the same things. Although our country’s political figures seem to disagree, most Americans dislike war, support education, and want the best for others. We share much of the same political and cultural values as Europeans in fact. The most bizarre thing I’ve noticed coming here is everyone seems to believe American culture is invading their own. But the US is a country founded by the British, French, Spanish, and Dutch with significant immigration too from, among others, Ireland, Germany, China, Italy, Poland, Russia, Japan, Korea, and Mexico... The idea that American culture is basically BBQs is absurd. Even the things America is famous for come from somewhere else, for example hamburgers are German, and blue jeans are French! My expectation that France wasn’t going to be that different from my own country has come true. I do not feel European, French, or in fact even that American... I just feel like a person! My home is where I am.

Sunday 15 July 2012

Theme 1 - France and Europe in the world (14-15 hours)


Questions
Topics
The EU and globalization    
Importance of the EU in a globalized world
- The Northern Range
- The Mediterranean region

France and globalization

- French presence in the world
- France, a major tourist destination
- Paris, world city

Hurricane Katrina... Are we all responsible to some degree?


Cyprien says...
Are we all responsible to some degree for the Katrina disaster? If we look at the natural disaster side of the event, yes we all are. The planet is heating up and we in the West are all responsible, it's a fact, and we can't do anything about it. Just by everyday living, such as buying food, we are contributing to global warming...
But hurricane Katrina became a human disaster because of the situation in New Orleans. It's a big city built under sea level, which is obviously risky... Plus the evacuation plans of the city were not efficient. The fact is, the poor were forgotten about, and the wealthier people escaped easily. This aspect of the catastrophe we are not all responsible for, it was the authority's fault mainly.
The picture of a globe in a classroom taken by Chris Jordan represents the violence and the impact that hurricane Katrina had on New Orleans and on the world in 2005.
The photograph uses the globe as a symbol, to make us understand that the education and the children have been gravely affected by this disaster.

Sarah & Julien say...
The messed up globe symbolizes the world falling apart... It is all dirty from pollution and the dirt also signifies the guilt of the people who did not foresee the consequences of Katrina. There is no movement in the picture; this is like the devastation and death after the hurricane. The grey background evokes the feelings of loneliness, loss and desperation.

Justine & Laura say...
The picture of a globe in a classroom taken by Chris Jordan represents the violence and the impact that the hurricane Katrina had on New Orleans and on the world in 2005.
The photograph uses the globe as a symbol, to make us understand that the education and children have been gravely affected by this disaster.
Jordan solicits our emotion and reflection. He demonstrates that Katrina has killed children which highlights the sadness of the event.
The globe is turned towards the side of the American Continent where the disaster occurred as if to accuse the Bush government and demonstrate that it is responsible to a large extent for mishandling the disaster's consequences.
He uses the idea of a globe to represent the inhabitants of the world in order to make us understand our responsibility during the event. As we are members of this large community we are all concerned and all responsible in a way for this terrible event which means that we should help each other and be more respectful of Nature.
Can we link this disaster to climate change? Experts still don’t really know. The only thing we can be certain of is that we will be confronted with other environmental disasters similar to this one during the coming decades.

Marion says...
Are we all responsible to some degree for the Katrina disaster? First of all, it is important to state that a hurricane needs two essential "ingredients" to develop: warm water and moist warm air. If we take this fact into consideration, we could easily link the increase in hurricane frequency, that has taken place throughout the past decades, to global warming, whose aftermaths have drastically intensified since the industrial revolution. From this point of view, we certainly could say we all are partly responsible for the Katrina catastrophe as we all are unconsciously contributing to global warming through our everyday "modern society" mass consumption. However, we are definitely not fully culpable for the immensely negative turn the proportions took. Indeed, we must not forget that New Orleans was built under sea level on marshy land that had previously been drained. Furthermore, the dikes that had been built in order to protect the city in case a catastrophe of this amplitude would happen were obviously to weak to be effective. Moreover, the social and human consequences would certainly have been hindered if the authorities had been prepared more thoroughly to handle such a situation and had decided to put in place the evacuation plan earlier.
Even if we actually realize we are responsible to some degree for the Katrina disaster, the past remains the past and we unfortunately cannot go back in time and fix what we did wrong. This is why we need to focus on the future and try to measure and adapt our actions according to the possibly devastating longterm consequences they will have. We can hope that the trauma and media coverage Katrina engendered will stimulate people's awareness towards the world they live in.

Jonathan says...
The globe in a classroom is the emblem of education. It symbolizes the knowledge of children and their leaning. But in this photograph, we see their knowledge has been "damaged". Something is stopping them from learning, and that is hurricane Katrina. Katrina destroyed many schools and buildings, and killed many people. The globe shows us a general view of who was affected. We first see the American continent, which was the most severely affected. This globe not only shows that America was concerned, but that the whole world should feel concerned. It's not because it's happenening somewhere else that it doesn't affect us. We all have a part of responsibility in what happened. The same issue keeps coming back: what reinforces hurricanes and contributes to their strength is global warming. There is no denial possible; we are responsible for that. America has the highest CO2 emissions in the world, but Europe and Asia also contribute significantly. We should be more cautious to prevent a similar disaster from occuring in the future. We have to do what we can to minimize the damages. We must reduce our CO2 emissions and insist that America signs the Kyoto Protocole. We can all do something together to prevent this. The whole world is at risk, but if everybody does what they have to, we can prevent the world from being destroyed, or from destroying itself.
Are we all responsible to some degree for hurricane Katrina? In 2005, a deadly hurricane hit the South of the United States: Hurricane Katrina. It killed almost 2000 people. Are we really all responsible for the massacre and the destruction in Louisiana? Are we responsible for the fatalities and should we feel guilty towards the families who lost someone they loved? Are we responsible for the $100 billion damages caused by Katrina?
Hurricanes occur naturally, mainly in tropical zones like Florida. They destroy everything in their path. People lose their homes and property, and many had to be evacuated. Unfortunately, in New Orleans, the alert wasn't given early enough, and therefore people were trapped. Nobody was prepared. Not enough help was sent to help the residents and evacuate them. Some decided to barricade themselves in their houses and refused to leave, but that was only a minority. If we look at the fatalities, many poor people died in the hurricane. Why? Some places in New Orleans are under sea level. These are mainly poor neighborhoods. The rich neighboorhoods are high up above sea level and protected from the floodings. The lands in southern Louisiana are vulnerable. There should be laws about building under sea level or near marshlands. In addition, under President Bush's administration, many soldiers were in Iraq when they could have been called in to save many people in New Orleans. Finally, the levees that were built to protect the city weren't very solid. It would have cost the city a great amount of money to construct efficient and solid ones. As Europeans, we are not responsible for those factors, but we are responsible for another factor... It has been scientifically proven that global warming contributes to making storms and hurricanes more powerful and more severe. In 2005, America experienced a dreadful hurricane season. Many hurricanes kept hitting America, again and again. We are entirely responsible for making those hurricanes deadlier and stronger through global warming. We must be careful in our everyday life to minimize our impact on the environment and reduce our CO2 emissions. Each time we buy, waste, or use a product, we contribute to polluting the Earth in a small way and therefore making these storms worse.
To conclude, I think we, as Europeans, are indeed at least partially responsible for what happened in New Orleans. It was a natural event but was worstened by human fault. Most of the casualties could have been prevented. As individuals, we should be cautious about global warming which contributes to build stronger storms and hurricanes. As global citizens, whether European, American or from any other nation, we should be cautious about who we vote for. The President must spend the nation's money wisely and use it to have an elaborate protection and evacuation system in potential hurricane zones. The local authorities should insist on reinforcing the existing levees and laws should be passed about building in areas that are at risk. We should be prepared.

Programme de GEOGRAPHIE en première OIB

France et Europe :
dynamiques des territoires dans la mondialisation


Thème 1 - France et Europe dans le monde (14-15 heures)

Questions Mise en œuvre
L'Union européenne dans la mondialisation
- L'Union européenne, acteur et pôle majeurs de la mondialisation
- Une façade maritime mondiale : la « Northern Range »
- Une aire de relation de l'Union européenne : la Méditerranée
La France dans la mondialisation
- La présence française dans le monde
- La France, pôle touristique mondial
- Paris, ville mondiale


Thème 2 - L'Union européenne : dynamiques de développement des territoires (14-16 heures)

Questions Mise en œuvre
De l'espace européen aux territoires de l'Union européenne
- Europe, Europes : un continent entre unité et diversité
- L'Union européenne : frontières et limites ; une union d'États à géométrie variable
- Disparités et inégalités socio-spatiales : l'action de l'Union européenne sur les territoires
Les territoires ultramarins de l'Union européenne et leur développement
- Le développement d'un territoire ultramarin : entre Union européenne et aire régionale (étude de cas)
- Discontinuités, distances, insularité, spécificités socio-économiques


Thème 3 - Aménager et développer le territoire français (14-15 heures)

Questions Mise en œuvre
Valoriser et ménager les milieux
- La gestion durable d'un milieu (étude de cas)
- Potentialités et contraintes du territoire français (ultramarin compris)
La France en villes
- Mouvements de population, urbanisation, métropolisation
- Aménager les villes : réduire les fractures sociales et spatiales
- Entre attractivité urbaine et nouvelles formes de développement : les espaces ruraux
Les dynamiques des espaces productifs dans la mondialisation
- Un territoire de l'innovation (étude de cas)
- Les espaces de production agricole en lien avec les marchés européens et mondiaux
- Dynamiques de localisation des activités et mondialisation
Mobilités, flux et réseaux de communication dans la mondialisation
- Roissy : plate-forme multimodale et hub mondial (étude de cas)
- La connexion inégale du territoire français à l'Europe et au monde par les réseaux de transport et le numérique


Thème 4 - Un État au choix : dynamiques de ses territoires dans la mondialisation (15-16 heures)

En géographie, le programme est conçu pour être traité dans un horaire annuel de 57 à 62 heures.

Can Scotland afford to become independent?