Mikhail Gorbachev was in parliament Monday for the Energy Globe Award where he picked up a lifetime achievement award. The former Soviet president now has his own think tank and is president of the environmental Green Cross Foundation which promotes humanitarian causes. In an interview, he spoke of his fears for the environment and warned of the chaos that threatens the world. He also criticised the "poor decisions" of today's political elites compared to those of the 1980's.

 

 

The major problems are poverty, air and water quality, unsanitary conditions, low agricultural productivity, but all of them are about ecology. It is nonsense to say that ecology is a luxury - it is the major priority of our times. The second priority is the fight against poverty because 2 billion are living on $1-2 a day. The third one is global security, including the nuclear threat and weapons of mass destruction. These are three urgent priorities, but I put ecology in the first place, because it directly touches all of us.

 

 

In the mid-80s the leaders of the big states realized that there is an urgent need to do something. Then God made the ways of Gorbachev, Reagan, Bush, Thatcher, Mitterrand and others - and they were wise enough to overcome clichés and prejudices regarding each other and start talking about the nuclear threat. Now the world and our times are different, there is globalisation, countries are more interdependent and countries like Brazil, China and India have come onto the stage.

 

The most important lesson we can take is that a dialogue has to be developed. Confidence has to be built. We have to renounce the politics of force, they bring nothing good. We have to understand that we all are in the same boat, we all have to paddle, if not, some are paddling, some are pouring water in, others might even be making a hole in it. Nobody will win in this manner in this world.

 

Look at the US in Iraq, everybody was opposed, even their allies, but they did not listen and what happened? They do not know how to get out of it now. Now we understand that... we are all linked to the US and if it falls apart it would be a real collapse. We have to help them to get out of there. That means that cooperation is needed, a new world order is necessary and global mechanisms to manage it.

 

After the Cold War everybody was talking of the new world order, even the Pope joined us and said a new world order is necessary, more stable, more fair, more human.

 

However, when the USSR fell apart (because of internal reasons first of all), the US could not resist the temptation to use the confusion. Political elites changed, those who brought the world out of the Cold War left the stage, the new ones wanted to write their history.

 

These errors of vision, poor decisions and missteps made the world ungovernable. We live in a world of chaos. New ways of life and new political mechanisms can emerge from the chaos, but the chaos can also lead to disruption, resistance and armed conflict.

 

 

It is not always about money. If international issues are handled in a disorderly way, you need more money. It is about trust, co-operation, dialogue, mutual help and mutual exchange. Why is Europe growing economically - because of the existence of the EU. This is the path of new opportunities and the EU is a good example.

 

Of course, not everything is perfect. In my view the EU is already overcharged as a system. It has to have wisdom and know when to stop, absorb, move forward, not just hurry and make hasty headlong jumps.

 

I think that the direction of Russia is right; however Russia is halfway through its difficult democratic transition. But Russia will go forward now. In the times of Boris Yeltsin everybody treated Russia as a doormat, but now this is no longer possible; you will have to forget those times. Russia will be at the same level as everybody.

 

 

Leading academic Professor Jeffrey Sachs met with MEPs on Parliament's Development Committee to discuss the food and health crisis in developing countries on 5 May. Repeatedly ranked among the world's most influential people by Time magazine, the advisor to the UN Secretary-General has written the bestselling "The End of Poverty" where he sets out his ideas for eradicating global poverty. During his visit we spoke to him about the current situation and how to solve the crisis.

 

 

World demand for food has outstripped world supply. The problem of supply has several different causes. First, productivity is very low still in Africa and some other poor regions. Second, climate shocks in Australia and in Europe and in some other grain producing areas. Also the diversion of food and feed production to biofuels and low inventory levels (the amount of food being stored) has played a part.

 

When world demand went up there were not large stocks of grain available and that meant that prices soared. Trade barriers thrown up by food exporting countries to keep prices low in their countries have sharply increased prices in food importing countries. Basically, the underlying challenge is that food demand has gone up sharply and food supply has not.

 

 

Of course! The most important step is to increase food production in the poor regions. Most of these regions, and again I focus on Africa, have levels of food output that are only one half or one third of what they could be. The problem is that the farmers are so poor that they cannot afford good seeds, they cannot afford fertilizers, and they cannot afford irrigation. I believe that in order to overcome this crisis we need to help finance the supply side of farming in poor countries. This would increase production, drive down prices and also help to solve this emergency situation.

 

 

The most important thing that Europe can do is to provide quick funding to poor countries to help those countries increase their own food production. This to me is the number one step - very practical. When Malawi, for example, introduced a programme in 2005 so that every peasant farm in Malawi could get access to fertilisers and to high-yield seeds, that little country was quickly able to double food production from one season to the next and it has kept that high level of crop since then with this policy. That kind of policy costs budgetary funds because the government ensures the availability of basic inputs to farmers at the low price and that's where Europe could help by funding African governments so they could fund their own farmers to produce more food. This to me would be the number one step. A second related step of course - not as urgent but, I think, useful - is to reconsider biofuel policy, to only promote biofuels that don't compete with food supplies or with land where food can be grown.

 

 

I think in a very short term this is going to be a matter of government programs to reliably increase food supply in poor countries. Over time the way we live and our food habits play a role. Everybody knows that it takes 8 kilograms of grain to produce one kilogram of red meat. So by depending on meat in our diets we put a lot of pressure on the food system.

 

So I think that diets that are healthy for us, that have less red meat and more vegetables and more fish, which may require only 3 kilograms of feed, could be a better trade-off for the whole planet. But in the immediate crisis right now, I think the role we can play is to tell our governments that we don't want our policies to neglect the urgent needs of a billion hungry poor people; that we want to see Europe and the US and other governments helping farmers in poor countries to increase the food supply so that this crisis doesn't persist.

 

 

"We sink or swim together" - that was the message the UN's chief scientist on climate change brought to MEPs on Wednesday 25 March. India's Rajendra K. Pachauri is Chair of the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) convened by the United Nations to forge a scientific consensus on global warming. We spoke to Dr. Pachauri before his visit to Parliament's temporary committee on climate change where he delivered a speech on climate change and global security.

 

Together with former US vice president Al Gore the panel was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize last December for their efforts to raise awareness of climate change.  

 

 

Dr. Pachauri: Climate change is likely to result in problems with the availability of water across the globe. This is a result of changes in precipitation patterns and in melting of the glaciers in different parts of the world, and the demand for water is increasing. You could have several regions in the world with a conflict over natural resources like water.

 

Another threat could result from extreme events like floods, droughts and heat waves which we have projected will increase in frequency and in intensity. Also a large movement of population could impact on agriculture. Those regions of the world that don't produce enough food to meet their own needs, may have no choice but to move to other locations, and when that happens in large numbers, that clearly has the seeds of conflict in it.

 

I suppose the Norwegian Nobel Committee, when it gave the Peace Prize to the IPCC and Al Gore, must have seen that climate change can be a threat to peace and stability. There is no part of the globe that can be immune to the security threat. We need to be conscious of that.

 

 

Dr. Pachauri: For a variety of reasons: in some parts of the world the stable supply of water into river systems comes from these glaciers, South Asia is one example, some parts of China another. So this could affect the very availability of water in these regions. The other problem with the melting of these ice bodies across the globe would be sea level rise.

 

It is already taking place to some extent as a result of thermal expansion of the oceans with higher temperatures. But if the huge bodies of ice of western Antarctica and Greenland ice sheets, sitting on land, were to collapse, that would really mean several meters increase in sea level. It's very difficult to say if and when this will happen but the possibility certainly exists.

 

 

Dr. Pachauri: Firstly we have to accept that there is certain inertia; even if we were to stabilize the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere at current levels, climate change would continue for several decades. Therefore in a sense we're not going to be able to stop global change, but to arrest its growth in the future. This makes it absolutely critical that we start reducing the emission of greenhouse gases by which the atmosphere and the climate of the earth can be stabilized.

 

Technology can certainly provide solutions to reduce emissions, but it comes into play only if we have the right set of policies. We need policies to promote the development of new technologies or the employment of the existing ones. We (the IPCC) have clearly stated in our report that the technology needed are already available or on the verge of being commercialised. These technologies will only be used if we have the right set of policies.

 

Suppose if governments would impose a tax on petroleum products; this would give the incentive to automobile companies to produce more efficient cars, also people could make more use of public transport. Pricing is an extremely important instrument to create change.

 

 

Dr. Pachauri: It is very important to reach an agreement by 2009. Europe can lead by example. Mahatma Gandhi said; "to be the change you want to see in the world". I believe strongly in this. Europe is such a large and important entity that if you create an example of success this will motivate and inspire other regions of the world. Politically Europe would gain power as well. It thus has a very critical role in setting the pace for meeting this problem of climate change. It's wonderful to know that the EP president is so interested in climate change. I feel very privileged to be invited here. the EP is a remarkable institution that provides optimism.

 

 

Dr. Pachauri: I think it has had two sets of impact. First of all: on the scientific community. It is an acknowledgement, a great encouragement and inspiration for all the scientific members of the IPCC. The second impact has been in elevating climate change in the consciousness of people all over the world. The Nobel Peace Prize certainly attaches a great deal of importance to the issue. As for me, I'm going absolutely crazy travelling (laughs). I can only accept 5 to 10 percent of the invitations I receive, but even that is enough to keep me flying continuously. This doesn't make me feel very good but the message has to be spread.

 

 

Swedish Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt was in the European Parliament on Tuesday 19 February to address MEPs as part of the future of Europe debate. He spelled out his vision of welfare reform, job creation and the need for the Europe to act on climate change. Prior to his speech we caught up with him and asked him a few questions about his attitude towards the EU, climate change and Kosovo.

 

 

The greatest achievement of Europe is to be found in peace, in cooperation and in trade. It's the first time ever that this has been possible and it is the European Union which makes it possible.  Moreover, it is opening up for others to join under the same circumstances.

 

The biggest problem is that although we have said we want an internal free market, it's still not yet fully there. Therefore for a small country like Sweden who has grown rich out of trading with others, it would be very helpful if the internal market really was the internal market, without so many national subsidies, national bureaucracy, and so on -  which get in the way of trade and greater efficiency.

 

On the changes that Lisbon could bring; (Sweden will hold the Presidency of the EU in the last half of 2009): I think everyone is very relieved that all the internal discussions seem to be over, that we can now discuss and focus on politics, on climate change and combating international crime. We will have better means to do that, but of course the institutional balance needs to be protected. We think the European Parliament will have greater influence on legislation.  

 

 

Laughs: I would say it would be one of the most fantastic moments in history if it was possible. Will Europe be able to take a decision regarding burden sharing? We were discussing a timetable with the European Parliament; Member States need to take their decisions, and hopefully once that's in place it will make Europe stronger to influence China, US, India. I also think it will be very decisive who will be the next President of the US.

 

I think it's very clear we need a Chinese leadership that says they are also part of the solution. We cannot say in these discussions that they are still an emerging economy and that's it's only the old industrial part of the world which should take responsibility

 

All these factors may come together in autumn 2009, if not in time for Copenhagen, then as soon as possible after. The Kyoto process was a "coalition of the willing". The problem is that the willing themselves stand for a minority of greenhouse emissions. The majority of the emissions come from countries outside the Kyoto protocol.

 

 

We think it was important to try and keep European countries together, but that has not been possible. We now have a division in the UN Security Council, and we have partly a division in the European Union. Even if we say yes to independence for Kosovo, we have to say at the same time that it will be a long term process under international influence. Therefore it will not be a new nation tomorrow, it's a nation emerging and it will take quite a long time.

 

There are specific circumstances regarding Kosovo. It cannot be linked to other situations of minority groups inside countries.  There are many divisions on this question. I think most can accept independence but many ask themselves what will happen in my home country. Kosovo is a specific situation. The Europe ideal is to take away barriers and make movement of people easier. So we will not accept new barriers and keep people from each other, that's not the European idea. We also need a European perspective for Kosovo, Serbia and all the Western Balkans.

 

 

Laughs: I think everyone wants their own model! My perception is that we have a Nordic welfare model. We are trying to further the argument we had in the election in 2006 - and the Swedish people agree - is that welfare cover is good but we need to create more jobs for people to sustain it. More jobs, more productivity, a strong economy.

 

 

Prior to being elected Slovenia's president in November last year, Danilo Türk had a distinguished career at the United Nations culminating in his appointment as Assistant Secretary General for Political Affairs. On Wednesday he was in Strasbourg to address MEPs. In an exclusive interview, we asked him about the role the UN and the European Union can play in the modern world, especially in promoting human rights and alleviating crises such as present rise in food prices.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wednesday morning saw the EU's chief banker, Jean-Claude Trichet, meet MEPs and national MPs in the European Parliament. A wide range of issues were discussed - from the turbulence in the financial markets to the state of Europe's economy. The European Central Bank President said the role of the ECB is to hold down inflation which will help prevent further market volatility. Here is a snapshot of some Mr Trichet's comments on the economy and MEPs' reactions.

 

His visit to the Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee came just after the US Federal Reserve cut interest rates. When asked if the ECB would follow suit he said the ECB's mandate: "is to deliver price stability for citizens, over the medium term, and be credible in this, so inflationary expectations remain anchored".

 

Following are some of the issues raised during the meeting along with Mr Trichet's replies:

 

On European Central Banks and their ability to react to crises: "Central banks may take actions aiming at restoring liquidity". However, "the effectiveness of crisis management and resolution depends largely on the existence of an effective supervisory Central bank framework able to identify and react at an early stage". He went on to say that "the main role of national central banks is "safeguarding financial stability".

 

On the Euro system: "it provides for an extremely strong and effective decision-making in the area of central banking".

 

On the European economy: "potential disturbances have EU-wide effect (and) the EU financial stability framework should therefore be able to detect any crisis with a cross border dimension".

 

On inflation: it must be kept under control "in all circumstances" but even more "in demanding times of significant market correction and turbulences when central banks are "responsible of solidly anchor inflation expectations".

 

On recent turbulence in the financial markets: "there will be very important lessons to be learned by credit institutions in terms of risk management....the experience of the turbulence has highlighted that some categories of risks have been underestimated by banks".

 

Mr Trichet went on to say that "it is still too early to draw any definitive conclusions" as the present market correction is "complex". The "turbulent episodes that we are observing are a vivid reminder of how a disturbance in a particular sector can propagate across many markets and many countries".

 

 

French Socialist Pervenche Berès said that Mr Trichet "did not give an answer to the current issues at hand, but he has been rather precise reaffirming that the policy of the ECB is centred in price stability and he was clear asking those responsible for setting prices and the social partners to respectively look at the risk of inflation and constant pressure on salary negotiation".

 

Spanish MEP José Manuel García-Margallo (EPP-ED) said "Trichet was very generic in his intervention about the supervision system or cooperation between national banks...it was not what we expected".

 

Mr Trichet did not answer the "doubts and preoccupations" of people and MEPs over the banks intentions, he said. "We still do not know what the ECB wants to do concerning the monetary policy, or whether to introduce some measures like the US just did. To me it looks like the orchestra of Titanic still playing while the vessel is sinking".

 

German Liberal Wolf Klinz was more upbeat and positive about the ECB Chief's remarks: "I did not expect any further revelation today like interest rates developments, monetary policy or whatsoever". He went on to say that Mr Trichet underlined that "crisis management depends on the existence of an efficient supervisory and central banking framework".

 

On the need for pan-European cooperation to deal with financial issues he agreed with Mr Trichet that "cooperation between supervisory authorities will have to go further".

 

Wednesday morning saw Slovene Prime Minister Janez Janša outline to MEPs the key aspects for his country's 6-month Presidency of the EU. He said that job creation and resolving the impasse over the status of Kosovo would be among his main aims. He contrasted the freedom and position the people of Slovenia now enjoyed with his persecution in Communist Yugoslavia. While he was in Strasbourg, we interviewed Mr Janša exclusively for the Parliament's website.

 

 

Wednesday morning saw Slovene Prime Minister Janez Janša outline to MEPs the key aspects for his country's 6-month Presidency of the EU. He said that job creation and resolving the impasse over the status of Kosovo would be among his main aims. He contrasted the freedom and position the people of Slovenia now enjoyed with his persecution in Communist Yugoslavia. While he was in Strasbourg, we interviewed Mr Janša exclusively for the Parliament's website.

 

 

Slovenia can contribute ambition, energy and the willingness of the generation which consciously decided to live in the EU and to build a European future together.  This enthusiasm - which shows also the results of the Slovene referendum in entering the EU - is very big in the new member states, especially as we are aware of the alternative to the EU. We know that it is much worse. Therefore we are ready to do a lot to maintain, strengthen and develop the EU. 

 

There are also concrete things. Since its independence, Slovenia has developed many good practices that other countries could emulate. For example during a discussion today in which about 50 MEPs took part, I was pleased that some Slovenian good practices were mentioned. I was very happy to see that MEPs from different countries know some of our products, our anthem, our history and so forth. This fills us with a special enthusiasm right at the start of the presidency.

 

 

I believe that during the following months we will move from the deadlock, which doesn't mean we will get a final solution. But we will begin to solve this issue, especially the question of status and the internal consolidation of Kosovo as well as the consolidation of the situation in the wider region of the Western Balkans.

 

Slovenia can contribute a lot to this - we are ready for that what is coming and ready to solve the problems of Kosovo - which is a part of Europe. The Thessaloniki Declaration ensured the Western Balkans a "European perspective". Kosovo is part of the Western Balkans. What we need to do now is to work on the basis of these two basic principles and take the necessary steps to ensure that the region is stabilized and the EU stays united.