During this period, when every important decision is suspended in the expectation that the pandemic will decrease earlier or later, further time cannot be lost for deciding which future we want for Europe.
Europe’s decision-making processes have been paralyzed since two years: first, because of the European Elections; afterwards, for the cumbersome procedure of forming the new Commission, and, finally, by the exception state during the Coronavirus Pandemic.
But already before, a hurdle of unsolved problems was cumulating: the uncertainty in the relationships with the rest of the world and the ongoing demographic, cultural, political, economic and technological decadence as compared with the other Continents.
Conscious of these dangers, Associazione Culturale Diàlexis is going on soliciting all responsible entities to take care of this urgency, inserting it into Europe’s priorities.We report systematically, via the Alpina-Diàlexis website, about our steps with the different Institutions. Only a few ones have given a response.
When we were urging, several decades ago, not to cede to irrealistic ideologies, nobody wanted to listen; when we tried to address the interest of Italian scholars towards the study the Central European social system, for deriving teachings from it, nobody was interested;when we travelled throughout the world for promoting a form of globalization which could be fruitful for Italy, Europe and third parties, we were boycotted by everybody; when we warned against complacency on the lack of a European Identity, people even denied that the problem existed; when we warned that, without an annual theoretical growth of 4.5%, Europe and Italy would have been in a pernìmanent de-facto recession, this seamed to be unbeleavable, but now data about Europe’s positioning in the world economy in the last forty years are available and undeniable.
Now, we are warning about the technologhical gap between Europe, from one part, and China, US, South Korea and Israel, from the other.
Also now, most people try to misinterpret this warning, as if new technologies would mean just Industry 4.0, electrical car, solar plants and G5, whilst the world is driving towards Total Surveillance, concentration of Big Data, Quantic computing, Space rush. So, Europe will remain still more backward than before and will be obliged to accept, de-facto, the ideological and business solutions chosen by technological hyper-powers.
We have already published the letters sent to the members the ITRE Committee of the European Parliament. By this post, we report now about the letters addressed to the members of the Council and of the Commission.
Up to now, the only one authority which has given a follow-up answer is the President of the European Parliament, Davide Sassoli.
Turin, 22 May 2020
We have addressed to the Members of the European Council (including President Ursula von der Leyen), the following letter, which we send also to you for what is of your specific competences.
We take the opportunity to note that, in the website of the Commission, the page devoted to a “European Industrial Strategy”, included in the timeline for the European Digital Green Deal, and foreseen for March 2020, is lacking.
We understand that, in March, in the middle of the Coronavirus crisis, it would have been difficult to decide upon a European Industrial Strategy. However, without an Industrial Strategy, any Recovery Plan does not make sense, especially if it is linked to the 7 years budget 2021-2027. Our book and the attached proposal for the Conference for the Future of Europe constitute a tentative to fill this gap with the creation of a new entity devoted to a large part of this task: new technologies. The basic assumption is that, in the third decade of the III Millennium, no problem of mankind (environment, peace, culture, equity, health), not to speak of Europe, can be solved without mastering the new technologies, and first of all, Big Data, the Web, cyberintelligence, AI Digital Financing. As long as Europe gives up to have its own high tech, its decadence will go on indefinitely.
This decade will be decisive for the world’s and Europe’s destiny. Europe cannot remain a passive spectator of a technological revolution which runs contrary to the European Way of Life and to Europe’s legitimate interests.
We are confident that the Institutions will take care of this inconsistency both in working out the 7 years budget and in structuring the Conference on the Future of Europe.
We remain at your disposal for highlighting our studies and debates on this urgent matter.
Thanking you in advance for your attention,
For Associazione Culturale Diàlexis,
Associazione Culturale Diàlexis, Via Bernardino Galliari 32 10125 Torino, tel 0039011660004 00393357761536 website: http://www.alpinasrl.com
Ladies and gentlemen,
We had addressed ourselves to the rapporteurs to the Committee “Industry, Research and Energy” of the European Parliament in the session of April 28 for the discussion (and possible approval in first reading) of two proposals, concerning a revision of the regulation governing the EIT, and its re-financing for the period 2021-2027.
In that letter, we emphasized that, after the Coronavirus crisis, everything had changed in the world, so that preceding policies should be in any case modified. As President Ursula von der Leyen had said “…because this crisis is different from any other, so must our next seven-year budget be different from what we know. We will need to frontload it so we can power investment in those crucial first years of recovery”.
We had sent to the rapporteurs the digital file of the book “A European Technology Agency”, which we send to each of you, including a proposal of Associazione Culturale Diàlexis for an overall restructuring of European technology policy alongside the Commission’s priorities, and especially its Digital Strategy, thoroughly revised in the light of the recovery needs after the incoming economic crisis and Coronavirus.
We start by noting that the European Coal and Steel Authority, of which the 9th of May has been the anniversary, was at the end of the day a European agency for the management of a European consortium, which, at that time, represented the core of crucial industries. In the same way, we propose now to put, under the common European control, the most sensitive European industries: the ones of new technologies. As the Coal and Steel Industries were pooled because they constituted the basis of military preparedness, such are today Internet, European Champions, Artificial Intelligence, Digital Currencies, Energy control, Biomedical.
The approach followed up to now, where new technological developments in defence, aerospace, digital, biology, transportation, environment, communication, organisation, are so much dispersed as to result ineffective , has to be reconsidered thoroughly, with the idea of a sole planning organisation, common to EIB, Commission, Council, Member States, Regions, Companies and Cities, which may concentrate this huge effort of the next few years, for challenging, from one side, DARPA, and, from the other, “Made in China 2025”and “China Standards 2035”.
Let’s recall also that Jean Monnet, before been appointed the first Chairman of the High Authority, had been the French Commissaire Général au Plan, and before, had worked for a military consortium of the Allied forces.
It is sufficient to say that, as it results from the papers to which the Parliament is confronted now for the discharge of their accounts, the Agencies and Public-Private Entities of the Commission (mostly with high technological responsibilities) are almost 40, to which important entities such as ESA have to be added. It would be much more reasonable to have a sole big entity like MITI or DARPA, with a global vison of what is going on in all branches of technology, and the capability to react immediately.
We had sent the book and the proposals to members of Parliament and relevant Commissioners, urging them to consider its arguments and the proposals contained in it. Finally, we are also preparing a second book, devoted to a debate among intellectuals, politicians, European Movements and civil society, on technological humanism in Europe after coronavirus. We hope we will receive contributions from everybody, in time for influencing the ongoing debates. Of course, we think, in fist instance, of the addressees of this communication.
The basic idea is that, already before the Coronavirus crisis, the authoritative studies carried out by the French Senate (Rapport Longuet) and by the German Government (Nationale Wirtschaftsstrategie) had certified that Europe has no prospect to recover in time its positions in web industries, European Champions, cyber-intelligence, Artificial Intelligence, quantum computing, cyberwar, digital currencies, biotechnologies, before the proposed deadline of 2030, and the joint French-German Manifesto has already been overcome by the events of the last few months.
As a consequence, Europe’s situation is condemned to deteriorate constantly, from the point of view of overall economic results (see Mazzucato, Morozov and Zuboff), from the one of military security (De Landa, Dinucci, Mini) of environmental crisis (Greta Thunberg, “Laudato Sì, Querida Amazonia) and of the protection of citizen’s rights (Assange, Snowden, Greenwald), unless the European Union undertakes an overall strategy of reflection, of political debate, of institutional reform, culminating in a new era of Digital Humanism, alternative to the one of Superpowers.
For the above reasons, during the discussions about the 2021 seven years budget which are bound to start soon, as well in the ones that must precede the Conference on the Future of Europe, the question of an overall restructuring (philosophical, conceptual, geo-political, institutional, technological and financial) of the orientation of European society cannot be escaped.
For these reasons, a preliminary question is whether the existence of EIT still makes sense, and whether or not should it be merged with ESA and other entities.
Let’s recall just some fundamental and unresolved issues, which have to be addressed before it is too late:
-the lack of a digital-humanistic ruling class;
-the abuses of the digital-military complex in the areas of data storage, tax evasion and antitrust;
-the upgrading of the European society, from an Industrial Society, to a Society of Intelligent Machines;
-Europe as an ideal battlefield among great powers in all possible areas of human life: economic war, battle of narratives, NCBW, political destabilisation…
Our book, and our formal proposal for the Conference, has the ambition to suggest the headlines of a global response to these unanswered questions
President Sassoli has replied to us very kindly, suggesting to address all the members of the ITRE Committee, who are, in last instance, responsible for a decision together with the Council (see below).
We are at your disposal for further illustrating the proposals, as well as for collaborating with your services in arriving at more concrete results. At the same time, we are addressing the same appeal to the Commission, so that this crucial deadline of European history is not missed.
We would be honoured by any reaction on your side, and we remain available for any form of cooperation.
Thanking you for your attention,
Associazione Culturale Diàlexis
Associazione Culturale Diàlexis
Via Bernardino Galliari 32
Da: SASSOLI David, President <President@europarl.europa.eu>
Inviato: martedì 12 maggio 2020 11:07
A: Riccardo Lala <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Oggetto: RE: Sessione straordinaria del 28 aprile della Commissione Industria, Ricerca e Energia D(14934)
Caro Dott. Lala,
Grazie per la Sua cortese lettera, per la pubblicazione “European Technology Agency” e per le proposte dell’Associazione Culturale Diàlexis sui nuovi ecosistemi tecnologici.
Il pacchetto “EIT” sta seguendo la normale procedura legislativa e si trova attualmente in prima lettura ad una fase iniziale. In occasione della riunione della commissione ITRE, lo scorso 28 aprile, si è tenuto un dibattito approfondito che ha messo in luce come la crisi provocata da Covid 19 sia attualmente al centro del confronto e delle decisioni politiche europee. È in questo contesto che gli europarlamentari di ITRE sono ora chiamati a presentare gli emendamenti al pacchetto “EIT”. Relativamente alle implicazioni sul bilancio dell’EIT, il Consiglio Europeo sarà inoltre chiamato a decidere sul prossimo Quadro Finanziario Multilaterale (MFF), relativamente al quale la Commissione europea avanzerà presto una nuova proposta che dovrà riflettere la nuova realtà della crisi Covid 19 e della risposta da dare a quest’ultima.
Ho trasmesso la Sua pubblicazione al Segretariato della commissione ITRE affinché possa essere distribuita ai Relatori del pacchetto “EIT”. La invito inoltre a mettersi direttamente in contatto con i membri della commissione ITRE per assicurarsi che la sua proposta possa giungere ai legislatori che, in ultima istanza, saranno chiamati a decidere sulla questione.