SPEECH BY MR MEVLÜT ÇAVUŞOĞLU,

PRESIDENT OF THE PARLIAMENTARY ASSEMBLY OF THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE, AT THE OPENING OF THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE FIFTH SUMMER UNIVERSITY FOR DEMOCRACY

(STRASBOURG, 28 JUNE 2010, 9.00 A.M.)

Dear Chairman,

Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen

It is an honour and pleasure for me to address you at the opening of this fifth annual Strasbourg Summer University for Democracy. This University is a fine example of how many actors can work together to create something significant for the democratic future of Europe. They include the Council of Europe, the European Union, the City of Strasbourg, our host country France, numerous Schools of Political Studies around Europe, and many others.

I am also happy to see participants from outside Europe participating, including from Africa, within the framework of our cooperation with the Organisation Internationale de la Francophonie. I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate you, coming from Africa, on the excellent Word Cup football tournament held on your continent at the present time. Every day brings its share of international friendship in sporting competition.

The theme of this Summer University for Democracy is ‘Crisis of Leadership’. So, what, then, do we mean by ‘leadership’? And what do we mean by ‘crisis’?

I think that leadership can be defined around a number of concepts or principles. One is the ability to see further ahead than the short-term, to be able to identify the risks and dangers - but also opportunities - inherent in the medium to long-term future.

Another would be the ability and the willingness to explain these risks, dangers and opportunities to people around you, and to get them to share these appreciations with you and act with you in facing them.

A third element would be to take a lead in initiating action, and to maintain the course, even though it may not be popular with everybody in the short-term.

Yet another concept would be to be able to identify the personal qualities of those you want to take the lead - their strengths and limitations - so that each can be entrusted with the right set of tasks, and to show them respect at all times.

All these elements seem to me to be important to good leadership.

At this session, we will mainly be talking about leadership in politics. However, leadership is to be found everywhere in society, and I believe it is important all around: from your local football team, to companies that make up our economic life, to associations of all kinds, which provide the backbone for that essential element of democracy which we call ‘civil society’. All these actors are somehow connected with each other and contribute to the final result.

Then how should we define a ‘crisis’? Well, a crisis can be said to consist in major dangers that suddenly become evident to us all. Often they follow a period of calm, of things going generally well. Today’s financial and economic crisis in Europe - and the world - provides a very good example. I shall return to it in a few moments.

So let us now turn to the issue of “leadership in crises”. One school of thought holds that you see fewer good leaders in times of “non-crisis” – that is, when things go well in most respects - than in periods of crisis.

The thinking is that great leaders come to light only when a crisis happens. Some go so far as to say that “the worse the crisis, the greater the leaders that arise”.

Winston Churchill is often mentioned here. Churchill was a man who, during many years, had a rather unsuccessful career as a politician. Indeed, as First Lord of the Admiralty he was held responsible for a number of what are considered as grave mistakes during the First World War, such as the disastrous expedition to Gallipoli, in present day Turkey, in 1915. Following his demotion after this, and after other political setbacks, he called himself, in 1922, “a man without an office, without a seat, without a party and without an appendix”.

However, in 1940, at the outbreak of the Second World War, he turned out to be precisely the leader that the United Kingdom needed in its worst ever hour of crisis. He seemed to grow along with every challenge arising around him.

So, may we conclude, that great leaders will always arise in times of crisis? Some observers are not so sure. They point to other moments in history when good leadership seemed to be lacking all around, such as during the events that led to the First World War in 1914, when most of those who were in charge seemed to be living in an artificial vacuum, as Europe drifted from the assassination in Sarajevo to mobilisation, and then to war for four disastrous years.

At other times, however, highly capable leaders seemed to be ready on all sides to take care of a crisis, such as during the American Civil war, when President Abraham Lincoln on the Union side had a most able contender to deal with in General Robert E. Lee on the Confederate side. So maybe here we cannot generalise.

However, what I believe is safe to say is that, towards the end of a relatively long period of “non-crisis”, leadership qualities can decline - perhaps naturally enough, as fewer difficult decisions have to be taken than in a crisis, when people have to ‘sink or swim’, ‘do or die’ or whatever expression you may choose.

Now, please do not get me wrong. Do not think that I in any way prefer crisis to the absence of crisis. On the contrary, the whole meaning of political life can be said to be to help steer a society away from crisis.

But what I have said points to the need to maintain the quality of political leadership also in times of non-crisis, so that leaders may be able to prevent crises from arising; and if they do happen, to be able to help society to get over them more quickly and with less pain.

Now, let us take the leadership displayed firstly before the current financial and economic crisis; secondly in the immediate response to the crisis especially in the autumn of 2008 when it rapidly turned for the worse following the collapse of the New York financial firm Lehman Brothers; and, thirdly, the present time, when very tough and difficult decisions have to be made.

During phase one - before the crisis - many countries in Europe and the world became increasingly frivolous in the running of their financial, economic and fiscal affairs, and that is one reason why we suffer such a deep and prolonged crisis at the present time. However, this was not the case everywhere - not everywhere in Europe nor everywhere in the world. For instance, Canada is often mentioned as a country which has felt very little of the financial and economic crisis. The general explanation given is that Canadian leaders had put in place good banking regulations well in advance of the crisis, while also pursuing a sound fiscal policy.

In phase two - in the autumn of 2008 with the fall of Lehman Brothers - the countries that were particularly hit by the financial meltdown, acted very quickly in introducing multi-billion euro, or dollar, financial aid packages, especially to the financial sector. True, here leadership was expected, and shown. However, it does not perhaps take that much leadership to hit the emergency stop when a train threatens to derail.

It was clear that the whole economy of our countries faced a serious risk of collapse unless such financial support was given, and it was pushed through several parliaments in a matter of a few weeks.

At the present time, however, in phase three, leadership of a higher order is called for. Governments can no longer spend much additional money, because little is left and a country’s credit rating might be in danger of downgrading if they do. So here it takes real leadership on the part of many of our governments and parliaments, to explain to the people why budget deficits and the national debt must come down, and to suggest ways in which the burden can be shared equitably among different groups in society.

In addition, much leadership will have to be displayed in coordinating action with other European countries on how to do this, so that the actions of one do not compromise those of the others.

Time makes it impossible for me to go into detail here, but I believe that leadership qualities will have to be based on ethics and a keen understanding of history and society among those in leadership positions. Secondly, even though leadership must be shown in all parts of society also in crisis, it must start with the political leadership, whether it be in government or in parliament.

Only two weeks ago I attended a meeting of the Council of Europe’s “European Forum Cyprus”, held in Nicosia. The “European Forum Cyprus” is co-financed by the European Union and provides a platform for young Cypriot leaders from all walks of life in the two communities in the island.

It is meant to foster social contacts and discussion across the island’s divide, and thereby contribute to mutual respect, confidence and co-operation between future generations of leaders of the island. I was very impressed with the quality of these future leaders and the way they reasoned. In a way, I saw leadership in the process of being formed, matured, all for the benefit of the future of that divided island.

Your present Summer University is of similar significance - for Europe but also for you participants, who are among those who will be called on to assume important leadership positions in the future. I wish you every possible success in what you do and hope that you will be able to base your action on those values on which the Council of Europe, and indeed the European Union, are founded: democracy, human rights and the rule of law.

And I wish particular success for our female young leaders. We are witnessing a revolution of sorts – in Europe and the world – in which women are rising in large numbers to claim leadership roles in our societies. Much remains to be done, and the Council of Europe and its Parliamentary Assembly are in the midst of this struggle which I consider vital for the good management of the world of the future.

And may I wish the organisers of these Summer University sessions every possible success, this week and in the future.

This brings me to mention two recent reports of the Parliamentary Assembly more or less directly linked to our theme at this session. The first on ‘The future of the Council of Europe in the light of its sixty years of experience’. It was adopted in October of last year, with Mr Mignon, leader of the French delegation to the Assembly, as Rapporteur. And the second on “Democracy in Europe: crisis and perspectives”, adopted only last week by the Assembly, with Mr Gross as Rapporteur. Both texts are available here today.

In this last Resolution - it is suggested to form a Strasbourg Democracy Forum, as a kind of umbrella structure providing an international reference in the field of democracy and a laboratory for new ideas and proposals. This could give greater prominence and visibility to the Council of Europe’s message on democracy.

All the major institutions of the Council would participate and a Delegate for Democracy could be appointed to lead and inspire this new Forum and provide continuous reactivity on democracy –related issues.

I submit this idea to you, which in my view, merits serious consideration on our part.

Finally, may I say that the Akdeniz University in my home town of Antalya in Turkey, would be very happy to play an active role in relation to the Summer University and the Schools of Political Studies.

Mr Chairman of the Committee of Ministers, Madame President, Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, I wish this session every success .I can assure you that the Summer University and the Schools of Political Studies have the full support of the Parliamentary Assembly.