ROMA: A CHALLENGE AND OPPORTUNITY FOR A
     NEW EU PARADIGM OF ENLARGEMENT

     by Romanescu Salomeea
     Ph.D. student at University of Bucharest

     Abstract
     The hypothesis: for all the relative improvements in the economic and political situation of the Central and Eastern European countries, CEEC countries could hardly become members of the European Union without finding solutions to the so-called "Romany problem", from EU and CEEC countries perspective. From the European Civil Society Perspective, in the mirror, for all the progress in the economic and future political integration of European Union, European Civil Society (resistance against the coercive European Political Society) cannot accept "the embedded neo-liberalism" (the EU's actual hegemonic Project) without finding solutions for so-called "social fracture"(including the "Roma problem "). This research is based on two theoretical perspectives: the integrative, and the neo-Gramscian one. The question is: can Romany Civil Society participate to the anti-hegemonic Project of European Civil Society, able to face the hegemonic project of European Political Society, "embedded neo-liberalism"? After examining Romanian case study the answer is affirmative because this is one example of the efforts of Romany Civil Society to understand their social situation and the possibilities to change it in alliance with other social forces of the Social Democratic Party. This study of the Roma's EU integration was made from two perspectives: as a challenge but also as an opportunity for the EU enlargement, by shifting from a paternalistic policies paradigm of coercion or mimicry for Roma (hidden structural discrimination) towards a new and more enlightened policies paradigm , based more on socio-economic rights and legal status for Roma in Europe.

     ROMA: A CHALLENGE AND OPPORTUNITY FOR A NEW EU
     PARADIGM OF ENLARGEMENT

     "Equal treatment of minorities is a cornerstone of the new united Europe."
      Romano Prodi, President of the European Commission

     Introduction
     A.1. Minority rights as a big challenge for nation - state
What can be done to meet the significant challenge of improving and expanding the condition of group rights worldwide? What are the remaining challenges? And what new strategies and policies should be formulated to effectively address these challenges? These are questions without a proper answer. This article cannot provide an answer; it can only invite you on further reflections and research on this field. We can start by assuming that, as long as the nation-state system continues to dominate global interaction, the state will continue to be the key provider, or alternatively, the major abuser of human rights towards its citizens. So it is important to shift from this paradigm and to recognize that states are not the principal actors of the international system: International Organisations, Individuals, Multinationals, Terrorist groups and Minority groups are also important actors of the new paradigm of globalisation. Other questions emerge from this shift of paradigm. How we can make this new actors accountable for the human rights violation? Do we have a mechanism of monitorisation and functional structure for it? Do actual concept of human rights is relevant for this new paradigm of International Relations?
     Human nature and human inclination tend to be short sighted. There is a tendency to tackle calamities only after a crisis situation has arisen. Suffering must have reached a high degree of intensity before there is readiness to alleviate and to remedy. Many find it convenient to close their eyes in the face of imminent dangers and imminent disasters. The attitude of "laissez faire, laissez - alert" appears to have great attractions to the human nature. What is now required is a certain degree of wisdom; a certain sense of care and responsibility; and what is equally required is a good deal of commitment to a morality which will enable us to look ahead, to invest into the future, to widen the limits of an immediate self-centred horizon, to transcend the boundaries of one's clan and generation. The preventive approach is not easy. The UN General Assembly pronounced that the realization of the new international economic order is an essential element for the effective promotion of human rights and fundamental freedoms and should also be accorded priority. Regrettably, the lack of political will and of moral conviction made the new international economic order ineffective and now largely obsolete.
     Throughout the accession region, minorities remain vulnerable to debilitating marginalization and prejudice, often due to candidate States' inability to develop meaningful mechanisms to combat discrimination and promote minority rights but also within European Union space. Though the accession process has been, its capacity to foster heightened minority protection has not been sufficiently developed. The EU can enhance accession's potential to leverage change by clarifying the standards it expects candidate States to meet, improving the performance of its own member States, encouraging candidate governments to muster genuine political will on behalf of reform, and engaging civil society as an equal partner because the actual European Integration can be evaluated "engine" of social conflict .
     At the Surface structure - minority rights are evaluated, as threat for security because the nation state is not able to deal with group rights, but at the deeper structure the "social fracture" of globalisation is the real threat for national and global security (actual security institutions are the "guardian" of global capital only) and this article will try to demonstrate this, by using two complementary theoretical approaches and perspectives for studding the Roma European minority and EU enlargement towards Central and Eastern European Countries. From the EU perspective Roma minority is evaluated as a challenge, " gypsy menace", but from CEEC perspective, Roma European integration can be evaluated as an opportunity for a new paradigm of enlargement, more comprehensive and human development oriented by including the "Roma Problem" in the" social problem "of Europe, which can be solved by aggregated efforts of European Civil Society, and intellectuals have the noble mission of the construction of the anti-hegemonic Project, in a neo-Gramscian terms.
     A.2. Structure of the article is motivated by the aims of this article which is double: surface structure's on the one hand and deeper structure's on the other hand which are presented after raising the awareness on the issue of Roma integration in Europe. Also in the introductory chapter we present two theoretical approaches: integrative and neo-Gramscian ones, which are instruments for understanding the deeper structure of European Integration. Introduction on the explanation of the conflicts of globalisation with the regional version European Integration, versus Unity opens the door for a deeper understanding of the process of globalisation and European integration which are the engine of the actual "social fracture" and to formulate the principal questions; What is the real threat of globalisation?      Can Roma Civil Society participate on the potential anti-hegemonic project of European Civil Society against the actual "embedded neo-liberalism", the hegemonic project of European Political Society? (EU as an "integral state" in a neo-Gramscian perspective.)
     A theoretical approach, framework for understanding the European integration and Globalisation, a set of arguments supporting the hypothesis, a case - study (Evaluation of Phare projects for the improvement of the Roma situation from Romania), and a set of concluding remarks, which form the structure of the research, are useful instruments for the aims of the research, at the same time, made from these two theoretical complementary approaches and from two different perspectives: Roma integration as a challenge and as an opportunity for a new paradigm of EU enlargement. These perspectives form the first and second chapter of the research. The evaluation of Phare project from Romania would like to show the intensifying resistance against such forces across Europe within the context of globalisation, is one example of all this conflicts and contradictions of globalisation.
     A.3. Aim of the research.
     A.3.1.The aim of the research at the surface structure is to reveal that the Central and Eastern European countries, but also the EU member states and the Roma themselves have to propose viable solutions for "Romany problem" not only mimicry policies, as soon as possible, according to commonly agreed standards, for making the process of EU enlargement possible. A common strategy in a cooperative relationship of all actors: EU, EU and non EU states and Romany community would be the only solution.
     A.3.2.The aim of the research at the deeper structure is to argue that established theories of integration - neo-functionalism and inter-governmentalism - are unable to explain such instances of structural change, because they are deterministic and take existing power structures as given and to reveal that trans-national social forces of capital and labour, supported by institutions linked to the global economy such as finance ministries, were behind the drive to membership of the EU, making a significant contribution to understanding of European integration and globalisation. Like in our case - study the Ministry of Finance signed the contract of Phare project for the improvement of Roma situation in Romania with imposed conditions.
     A.4. Method and theoretical approaches
     A.4.1. Neo-Gramscian perspective
     Neo-Gramscian perspectives focus on social forces, engendered by the production process, as the most important collec-tive actors. These forces are located in the wider structure of the social relations of production, which do not determine but shape their interests and identity. Those forces of capital which stem from globally integrated production networks and support a complete neo-liberal outlook of the EU are opposed to the transnational capital fraction, which is dependent on the European "home market" and favours a more regionalist outlook for the EU including protectionist measures at the European level. While the state is still considered to be an important analytical category, it is regarded as a structure within which and through which social forces operate rather than as an actor in its own right. There are several forms of state and the national interest, the raison d'etat, cannot be separated from society, as it depends on the configuration of social forces at the state level. Gramsci's concept of the integral state is analyt-ically useful for the conceptualisation of the relation between state and society.
     On the one hand, the integral state consists of "political society": that is, the coercive apparatus of the state more narrowly understood including ministries and other state institutions. On the other, it includes "civil society", made up of political parties, unions, employers' associations, churches and so on, which represents the realm of cultural institutions and practices in which the hegemony of a class may be constructed or challenged: the one that can be called "civil society", that is the ensemble of organisms commonly called "private", and that of "political society" or "the state". These two levels correspond on the one hand to the function of "hege-mony" which the dominant group exercises throughout society and on the other hand to that of "direct domination" or command through the state and "juridical" government.
     Finally, neo-Gramscian perspectives take into account the indepen-dent role of ideas. . Hence ideas establish the wider frameworks of thought, which condition the way individuals and groups, are able to understand their social situ-ation, and the possibilities of social change.
By advancing upon the general conceptual framework of the Italian Marxist Antonio Gramsci, the study will attempted to explain the operation of hegemony at the international level as well as to consider change and transformation in world order. Hegemony constantly needs to be reasserted and is open to contesta-tion. Social forces from outside the historical bloc, but also from the margins within, may develop rival projects, challenging the hegemonic bloc and, in some instances, breaking it apart. In short, history is the result of constant struggle between social forces and is, therefore, con-stantly subject to change. European integration is no exception to this. Hence, while "embedded neo-liberalism" is hegemonic at present, this does not imply that it will also be so in the future. Highlighting the possibility of change is the first step towards ensuring actual change. The second step is an analysis of the potential forces and projects behind a counter-hegemonic bloc. The supporting social forces would come mainly from trade unions, organised at the European level, and those social democratic parties, which might return to their traditional policies. Also significant would be the participation of social movements that have a shared resent-ment against the logic of capitalist exploitation. This would include the variety of identity and social movements (ethnic, nationalist, reli-gious, gender, environmental) that have a common material basis and thus a potentially wide social basis. Especially in times of economic recession, it will be impor-tant for these counter-forces to put forward a coherent strategy, capable of rivalling "embedded neo-liberalism". This issue is crucial because the collective will of a counter-hegemonic movement, that lacks an inter-nal logic and social basis, could become dispersed and scattered into infinity of individual wills or identities reduced to separate and conflicting paths.
     A.4.2. Integrative theoretical perspective
     Any system or society needs initial starting conditions, axiom and values by which it can function. In former times religion, not science provided these. Moral values have for the most part been derived from a religion in one form or another. The antireligious beliefs that lie at the foundation of the modern secular society produce a society that deeply reflects them. The strategy for the improvement of Romani situation from Romania lacks such moral values.
"A single theory can never be evaluated in isolationism, but only as part of network of theories" . The actual paradigm of knowledge is not able to explain the reality of globalisation and European integration and to give solution for the "social fracture", including "Romany problem". The principal paradigms of exploration of social reality are based on the axiom of the incompatibility among the spheres of Natural and Social Sciences, Religion and Ethics, Applied Sciences. This thesis is an exercise to transcend this axiom with all limits of a pioneering work and the imperfections of the methods on this new field, experienced by Landegg International University from Switzerland. Politics has to be considered as a highest value of society and making policies based on Ethics would be a noble mission of a counter-hegemonic process of the European Civil Society.
This fragmentation reflects the schizophrenic state of the human being's inner self, projected onto social life; a fragmentation which divides everything: our minds (increasing specialisation and decreasing integrative approaches of knowledge at individual and epistemological community level), parents and children, men and women, minorities and majority (at community level), employers and employees, the government and the people, the social classes (at institutional level), the North and the South ( at global institutional and international community level).Thus, two seemingly incompatible tendencies of integration and disintegration are present at the same time and they are playing out at all levels of life: the individual, the group, the organizational, the societal and the planetary.
Though there is some limited agreement that certain things have changed, there is not yet a common vision of what those changes mean, and where they may lead. If no new vision emerges, the "natural" but tragic tendency would be to revert to old habits, to view what might be a new landscape through the "lens" of an outdated paradigm.
     It would not be enough for each state or people to have its own vision of a better future, in our case not only the Countries from CEEC space have to have a strategy for the improvement of the Roma situation but the EU as a whole, as a new political entity which has to be able to deal with so called minorities problem and specially with Roma minority which is an European one. Sovereignty was perhaps a step forward in the long winding pilgrimage of humanity in search of more security and stability against tribal and feudal domination. Today, however, sovereignty supports the interests of the dominant elites and power structures in every state. Many of these are repressive and oppressive, and, therefore, not really responsive to the people they represent. Thus, we have to look beyond a world constructed around a narrow conception of national sovereignty, toward a world where key principles and priorities are shared by all; where key policies can be implemented in a coordinated way across borders and continents. Otherwise, independent individual actions will only lead to further frustration, competition and conflict. There may be new opportunities for peace in our world, but we fail to realize them because of our involvement in and commitment to a militarisation born of old fears and divisions. Rather than adapting policy and expenditure to a new agenda of challenges and opportunities, selective perception and "bounded rationality" cause us to misinterpret our current situation so as to validate the application of coercive and violent means. A simple lack of imagination prevents us from finding and implementing new solutions to old problems. Such shortcomings are both illogical and morally unacceptable. Therefore, the formulation of a new vision is long overdue.
     Asking can summarize these issues: what should be the "exception" and what the "rule", in contemporary world affairs. This question has usually been framed in terms of a debate between "realists" and "idealists": i.e. those who believe in interest and coercion, and those who believe in principle and collective action. This debate seems outmoded to us. World affairs reflect both coercive/violent modes and cooperative/exchange modes. The real issue is how we think this "mix" can and should evolve. This represents the core of the matter. Much more time, effort and intellectual capital have been expended analysing and explicating the use of force in human affairs, than in examining the nature and dynamics of cooperation. The solution can be to take the ideal as reality. In our case the Roma civil society has to look after dynamics of cooperation with other social forces and European institutions, don't be isolated and oppressed by a coercive political society.
     Power politics and militarisation, as a principal variable of a super-power didn't encourage development of social sciences for finding a social model able to deal with the contemporary challenges of globalisation. The need of new instruments of understanding the social reality, new methods of investigation, integrative ones for finding solutions for actual "social fracture": new Political and Civil Society entities able to deal with the real threats of globalisation, together in a cooperative relationship is acute. The roots of conflict found in human nature has been proven wrong by current integrative approach of sciences and starting from this, we need a new paradigm of international relations able to explain the reality and to create new type of relations between states and other international actors, cooperative not competitive and conflicting, because the conflict arise from the dynamics of inter-state relations, power politics instead of normative politics. So we can't find solutions for actual global problems without a new theory of knowledge and of international relations implicitly, integrative one.
The Comprehensive Approach to Minority Protection of EU is one example of integrative perspective on a specific area. Two main approaches to the protection of minorities have emerged in Europe: enforcement of anti-discrimination norms, and support for minority rights. Anti-discrimination measures are designed to ensure that individuals are not treated differently from others for unjustifiable reasons. Minority rights protections aim to allow individuals and communities to preserve their differences so to avoid forced assimilation into a majority culture. The Regular Reports of the European Commission employ the phrase "minority rights" broadly so as to include within its ambit both aspects of minority protection. Thus, the Copenhagen criteria requirement of "respect for and protection of minorities" necessarily embraces both protection from discrimination and traditional minority rights. Roma, transnational minority face immediate and pressing problems of systematic exclusion from the societies in which they live, including discrimination in access to education, employment, health care, and goods and services, for which legal redress is rarely forthcoming. In view of the foregoing, the evaluation of Phare projects from Romania follow the Commission in evaluating conditions in the candidate countries through the lenses of both anti-discrimination and minority rights.
     B. Formulation of the question
     The principal question of the research is the next: Can Romany Civil Society participate to counter potential hegemonic project of European Civil Society; facing the actual hegemonic project of coercive European Political Society "embedded neo-liberalism"?
     "Mayeutica", the ancient Art of Socrates, will help as by answering to other questions before finding the answer to the principal question.
     From their first appearance in Europe to our days, Roma have been considered a "problem " by the various states and a threat by Western      States relevant, for this, is the paradox of Roma migration.
     B.1.Roma permanent migration is a myth or reality?
Migration was for Roma been a defence against external aggression and discrimination and means of seaming a livelihood. Existing non identification with the country they are leaving in, combined with a lack of confidence in the social structure and legal institutions, authority crises, are some of the main reasons way some Roma take this decision to leave relatively easily while the nomadic or semi-nomadic way of life for finding working conditions and survival ones, has always preferred by some Roma through their history, many have chosen to settle at various time in history. So Roma permanent migration is a myth not the reality. Romany population was forced to be nomad or semi-nomad by coercive measures of authorities.
     B.2.What is the paradox of Roma migration?
     Paradoxically, the law in many places have forced sedentarisation on those who preferred to stay nomadic specially in ex - communist space, while in other places or at other times, restrictive or repressive laws kept those who wished to settle constantly on the move.
     B.3.The real threat for the International Security is "Romany problem" (Roma migration) or "social fracture" of globalisation?
     To answer this question we have to analyse: to what extent, and in what ways, does globalisation contribute to international and intra-national conflict?
     To answer this question a number of questions will guide us in this attempt, which can be summarized as follows: 1.What happens? 2. Way is it happening? 3. How can this be judged?
     1.What happens?
     Globalisation, as well as the economic regional integration processes, create a gap between powerful economic convergence - simple globalisation (American type of economic integration) and less powerful complex convergence - complex globalisation (new European type of complex integration, EU new embryonic structural power which can create unity in diversity at global and regional level, and vertical community), and also create discursive tensions originated on the gap between rhetoric and reality of globalisation. For analytical purposes, the most helpful use of the term globalisation is to clarify this process, within various trends and counter-trends, tendencies and counter-tendencies need to be specified rather the notion of globalisation itself, so we should look for causes and consequences. Individual, State and International System level of analysis, is relevant also for the explanation of the conflicts of globalisation, individual and collective human rights, whose violation gives rise not only to injustice and tension but also to unpredictability and instability and hence to international insecurity.
     Globalisation historical, multilevel and multilateral process appears as a new type of relationship between old and new actors of international system, which involves simultaneous trends of integration and fragmentation of solidarity at all levels: individual, community to one side and institutional (local, regional and international) to the other side (so world turbulence). The nature of this relationship can be competitive or cooperative, in an ideal case. The relation became the new unit of analyses of the international system. From the conflicting nature of the relations between these new actors, on the one hand (minorities, public opinion, terrorist movements, nongovernmental organizations, epistemological community, individuals and multinationals - non-state logic or private sector, conflict is present also between these private actors) and old actors on the other hand (nation-states - state logic or public sector- the conflict between groups of states; between centre, periphery and semi-periphery, between the sovereign states and international intergovernmental organizations in search of new identity and legitimacy) and from the conflict between different levels of governance systems including: economic, political, strategic and diplomatic on the one side (the logic of global capital characterised by individualistic and corporate profit and self interest - hegemonic project of globalisation) and social, cultural, communicational, human rights, environmental, so human security and development sector on the other side (the logic of global Civilization designed to provide a good life for humanity - anti-hegemonic project of globalisation) start three principal types of conflicts of globalisation: structural, functional and legitimacy, at both international and intra-national level, because in this interrelated world the artificial boundaries between international and intra-national conflicts are being erased.(annex 1, new factors of risk )
     2. Why is it happening?
     Globalisation theorists draw attention to extremely important change, which have occurred in the organization of financial markets. This change reinforces the position of states actors following neo-liberal economic strategies and constrains social democrats, consequentially eliminating existing welfare regimes. To answer this question we have to analyse at two levels: the surface structure and the deeper structure. At the surface structure we have: structural Anarchy, Security Dilemma, Power Politics, Resource Scarcity, Ascriptive Factors (Culture, Nationalism etc.), Interdependence. At the deeper structure we find the discursive lack of a new functional paradigm of theory of knowledge and international relations, which can create solidarity of the actual discursive gap between the process of Integration and Unity. The old paradigm of the theory of knowledge thought as that Human society is fragmented into isolated parts, which are frequently in conflict and this is starting from the axiom of selfish and aggressive human nature fighting for power and survival extended to human society . This fragmentation creates different world views based on different conflicting values (religious values generator for cultural values), interests (big finance private interest against national and general public interest, national security competition against evolving cooperative security paradigm so called security dilemma ). Let's have a look on the classification of the causes and nature of conflict worked by Abduíl-Aziz Said and Charles O Lerche.
     Legitimacy conflict
     The paradox of identity and reflexivity is related to legitimacy conflict: minorities often see the state as no longer a advocate and guardian of domestic interests , but to a certain extent a co-worker with outside forces…and the growth of reflexivity through large access to information, increase the "disobedience" of citizens. Thus, in the 1990's it can be argued that the principal area of conflict may no longer be originate between states, but between the state and sub-national groups and individuals. Thus, reasons for conflict recline in questions of legitimacy; while its forms and ways of expression are culturally determined and influenced, international conflict is, consequently, no longer easily separated from racial, class or religious problems within the state and can be instrumented by political elites. (Authority crises)
     Structural conflict
     It is obvious on a global scale, where exists a mal-distribution of resources among states and people. Structural elements, such as asymmetrical relationships between states are considered at the core of international conflicts. Structure is described as a process whereby benefits in the system are distributed unequally, structure involves most visibly political and economic exchanges but also cultural, social interaction and environmental aspects, like clean water and air. The actual form of globalisation, driven by economic power, obviously promotes the hegemony of Western culture and economic Model and corporations and creates structural losers and anti-political movements. (annex 2) (Distribution crises)
     Functional conflict
     Functional theorists have proposed that the states system does not effectively perform necessary global functions. This judgement is based on the hypothesis that an efficient world order must carry out certain tasks to afford a minimum of services to the world's population. This strength includes such things as an effective communications network, adequate institutions for economic and security cooperation, and basic social welfare. Inefficiency in these areas results in human needs higher than the capacity of the existing structures available to address them; which, in turn, precipitates crises of legitimacy and conflict on both the intra-state and inter-state levels. (Institutional crises)
     3. How can this be judged?
In conclusion Globalisation process is evaluated as an "engine" of social conflict which creates institutional, authority and distribution crises because the actual global governance can't accommodate the biggest contradiction between the two logics of globalisation, the logic of global capital characterised by individualistic and corporate profit and self interest, and the logic of global Civilization designed to provide a good life for humanity, so "the continuing gap between Unity and Integration in the contemporary world order foreshadows further tensions and conflicts until its institutions and processes of governance can accommodate both the universalising and the localizing effects of globalisation and both logics of globalisation" , in other words the logic of private sector and the logic of public sector, by democratisation of actual global governance and structural foreign policy . The roots of conflict found in human nature has been proven wrong by current integrative approach of sciences and also the belief of Wilson that you get peace if you have free trade and democratic systems (capitalism is not democratic at all de facto), which in fact created discussed conflicts at international and intra-national level. Conflict arise from the dynamics of inter-state relations, power politics instead of normative politics, anarchy increase the likelihood of war in actual global order governed by death principals, Thanatos and less by life principal, Eros "the engine of unity", as Freud understood. Let's hope in the three activities virtues of "globalism" to bring unity trough solidarity: active communication for understanding, sharing of resources and mutual aid in difficult time.
     B.4.What is the link between " Roma problem "and "social fracture"?
     Market economy, especially the "embedded neo-liberal" version of it, has marginalized disadvantaged social groups, including the Roma even in the most developed European countries, despite efforts in the social field In Central and Eastern Europe the economic and political transition has aggravated their socially disadvantaged situation. So the solution for them is to migrate from Central and Eastern European Countries to Western European Countries but not only, like other people on more or less the same social and economic situation. All romany organisations proposed on several times, that states should explore the possibilities of concluding interstates agreements to provide the possibility of legal migration for seasonal work across international borders because the migration of the Roma has become a burning issue for the whole of Europe, although the number of Romany migrants is insignificant and not higher than the average migration trend from the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. This is because attracts greater public attention by his exotic nature. From their first appearance in Europe to the present days, the Roma have been considered a "problem " by the various states but we can't solve the Romany "problem" without solving the social fracture of globalisation. So, for Roma the globalisation and European integration is an opportunity to contribute to the anti-hegemonic project of European Civil Society, even International Civil Society in alliance with other concerned social forces, if not Roma problem will remain in one inertial paradigm, and Roma people isolated in their struggle for social justice. Political will for Unity and Globalism, new vision for new functional structures and the justiciability of the right to development are the key words for solving the two related problems of "social fracture" and "Romany problem."
     In conclusion the "Romany Problem" is benign threat, meanwhile the "social fracture" is malign threat for the National and International Security.
     C.2. Raising awareness on the Roma issue
     Roma from their first appearance in Europe till our days was and are still treated as an undesired group in all Europe according to the old paradigm of coercion and exclusion. In the post-Cold War period, facing an increase in the number of challenges, the Central and Eastern European governments have become relatively indifferent to Roma's problems. Meanwhile, it is the European Union that has become aware of the Romany issues, especially since early 1990s, when it saw a rise in the number of Central and Eastern European Roma trying to obtain asylum status in the West. But the EU tries either to ignore the Romany problem, or - rather - to avoid the Central and Eastern European Roma presence on the EU territory following the traditional western paradigm and motivating that is not a solution as is stipulated on the latest document of Parliamentary Assembly of Council of Europe:
     "59. Migration does not represent a true solution to the problems of the Roma in Europe. In order to tackle the root causes of migration, measures must be taken to increase confidence in and identification with existing social and political structures in the countries of origin. Priority ought to be given to combating all forms of discrimination, and encouragement should be given to the improvement of Romany communities' living conditions and social situation all across Europe.
     60. Special measures should be taken to help the Romany migrants from Central and Eastern Europe already living in Western European countries. It is important to prevent unauthorised stay in a country, and avoid the further marginalisation of refugees, asylum seekers and illegal migrants." This vision is in contradiction with the needs of the Romany community and their desire to migrate for seasonal work. The Central and Eastern European countries, but also the EU member states and the Roma themselves have to propose viable solutions to these issues starting from common standards and avoiding double standards for this European minority of Roma.
     The effective participation of the Romany minority in public life is a vital element in all-democratic societies, but the participation must always take a voluntary form. .
     In order to address this situation, a comprehensive yet most varied approach is needed. Better living conditions, improved social situation, legal status of Roma in all Europe and an efficient struggle against all forms of discrimination and segregation of the Roma must be a top priority in all the European states.
     While everybody else decides for them, the Roma are not able to assert the political weight proportionate to their numbers. So we need a real representation at all levels of Roma, inclusive at European level on all European Institutions.
     There is a need to strengthen, clarify and harmonise the work of multilateral organisations and Roma Civil Society has to be represented on all this structures and participate on the decision making process.
The Council of Europe can and must play an important role in improving the legal status, the level of equality and the living conditions of the Roma. The proposal of establishing a European Roma Consultative Forum is urgent. A Charter on the Fundamental Rights of Roma should be initiated. The need for the institution of a European Roma Ombudsman and a European Roma study and training centre is also urgent.
     Chapter 1
     FROM EU PERSPETIVE: ROMA AS A CHALLENGE FOR EU ENLARGEMENT
     The perspective of EU on this issue is "the enlargement of the EU to the Central and Eastern European candidate countries would bring in its wake a substantial growth in the number of Romany citizens of the EU. This perspective calls for investing joint efforts in setting up a consistent inclusive and anti-discriminatory framework for the Romany population, in the candidate countries and within the EU."
     The Romany problem proves to be, from this perspective, one of the greatest challenges for EU enlargement. Moreover, "their populations are young and faster growing than the average. Without education, they will miss out on civil rights, their communities will be further weakened and Europe 's social cohesion could be threatened." During the 1990s, the Central and Eastern European governments have tended to approach the Romany problems mainly from a "social "perspective, without directly linking it to ethnicity, politics, or minority rights. So, "problems of the Roma require more comprehensive policies, including elements of affirmative action."
     There are few European documents dealing with it: the document no.8830 (motion for a recommendation)/September 22, 2000, of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, whose title is "Improvement of living and social conditions of the Roma/Gypsy population in order to decrease possible Romany migration from the countries of Central and Eastern Europe."
     This European body notes that "the fight against all forms of discrimination and improving living and social conditions of the Romany/Gypsy communities should be a priority in handling the migration problems of the Roma/Gypsies from the countries of Central and Eastern Europe." But the same European institution is "concerned that in the past few years a growing tendency to migration, or at least growing intention of migration, has been felt in the Romany/Gypsy communities in all Central and Eastern European countries. As a consequence, some countries in Western Europe were forced to take legal measures to prevent Romany/Gypsy migration in greater numbers."
     The EU authorities still try to solve the Romany problem using a narrow perspective: they hope that providing Romany minority group with rights and opportunities in the countries whose citizens they are, could "prevent unmanageable outflows to the west." The EU governments do not seem to be very interested in solving this problem in the European Union itself.
Among the ones that are responsible for setting up and implementing anti-discriminatory measures and legal frameworks for minority rights per se are the EU member states, too. The European Council 's directive "of implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin," adopted in 2000 (Directive 2000/43/EC, the so-called "Race Equality Directive ") , has become part of the acquis communautaire. Therefore, its provisions have to be adopted by the CEEC in order to be accepted in the EU. But they have to be implemented by the EU member states, either, by 2003. This document is much more specific one in the field of minority rights (including the anti-discrimination provisions) than the body of legislation expressing the Copenhagen criteria of 1993 or than the provisions of the Europe Agreements or the Accession Partnerships concluded with the candidate countries.
     Meanwhile, the European Union urges the CEEC to consider the integration of the Romany minority in their societies an important priority and one example for CEEC countries. In order to support this process (the integration in the CEEC societies before the theoretical integration in the EU itself), the European Union is providing the Central and Eastern European states with a set of financial means, mainly through its Phare Programme. Important amounts of money have been used specifically for developing various (soft) cultural, educational, and legal projects for the Roma. Since 1998, these countries have also used their national Phare programmes to set up policies for improving the situation of the Roma in their societies, like in our case study from Romania. Other amounts of money have been provided by the European Union through other less significant programmes.

     FROM CIVIL SOCIETY PERSPECTIVE - ROMA AS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR A NEW EU ENLARGEMENT PARADIGM-EVALUATION OF PHARE PROJECT FOR IMPROVEMENT OF THE ROMA SITUATION IN ROMANIA

     From Civil society perspective the Strategy for improvement of the Roma situation from Romania can be a good example of collaborative relationship between the civil Society and political Society in a neo-Gramscian vision. This relationship can bridge the gap between this two building blocs. This process is a long term one and the civil society can play an important roll in balancing the embedded neo-liberalism. Civil society is a broader term including parties, NGO-s, trade union, religion's organisations.
Let's see what is the content of the Strategy for the improvement of the Roma situation in Romania on general lines and the social forces which participated on the drafting of this document and their role in the potential counter-hegemonic process of embedded neo-liberlism.
      A. The Programme-Content
     The Government Strategy provides for measure in ten areas, with detailed goals under each heading, an action plan, and time frame for each action specified. The ten sectors are an integrative approach but the sustainability aspect of time is not present. This strategy is made only for 10 years.
· Community Development and Public Administration
· Housing
· Social Security
· Health Care
· Economics
· Justice and Public Order
· Child Welfare
· Education
· Culture and Denominations
· Communication and Civic Participation .
     The Strategy starts from the premise that discrimination against Roma is a serious problem in Romania. The opening statement of the Strategy declares, "in the course of history, Roma were objects of slavery and discrimination, phenomena that have left deep marks on the collective memory and have led to the social limitations of the Roma
The text of the Strategy sets forth its guiding principles. First is the consensus principle, which the Strategy defines as "a joint effort of the Government and the representative organisations of the Roma community." The Strategy is also expected to correspond to the specific needs of the Roma, and to develop a framework in which Roma can participate fully in society. The approach is divided into different sectors or spheres of competence, and decentralised, assigning specific responsibilities to public institutions at the local level. All initiatives are to be in keeping with the Romanian Constitution and laws, and with international standards. Finally, the principles of equality and of the rights of Roma to maintain their identity are to guide the Strategy's implementation.
     Within the ten areas set out as the broad spheres of action, the Strategy delineates more specific goals for a comprehensive approach addressing both anti-discrimination and minority rights dimensions. These objectives include devolving responsibilities for Roma issues to local authorities; supporting the growth of an economic and intellectual elite among Roma; reducing negative stereotypes and eliminating unequal treatment practised by civil servants, and increasing tolerance in the public at large; and ensuring that Roma have equal opportunities to achieve a decent standard of life. This approach is a neo-liberal, based on elites. But in reality the elites are discouraged to work for their community and isolated because their ideas can be dangerous for the preservation of the status quo.
     The Government Strategy is complemented by existing legislation, including the Romanian Constitution that guarantees equality of rights for all Romanian citizens and the right to identity of individuals belonging to national minorities. Of particular importance is Law 48/2002, formerly Government Ordinance 137/2000 on the elimination of all forms of discrimination, which makes Romania one of the few states already in line with the EU Race Directive (2000/43/**).
     Roma Civil Society organisations were consulted and involved in the process of drafting the strategy, which particularly contributed to the enhanced level of anti-discrimination measures. Since the program's adoption, however, NGO representatives have registered their dissatisfaction over the delays in implementation, especially regarding anti-discrimination provisions. NGOs have also expressed concerns about the objectivity of the Joint Mixed Committee for implementation and monitoring of the Strategy, and the political criteria used to select personnel in Roma-related projects. Some representatives of Roma NGOs have stated that the government has a different vision regarding the implementation of the Strategy than their own, and have called for more functional collaboration with Roma Civil Society in its implementation.
     Implementation of the two components of the Phare project for Improvement of the Roma situation was delayed by some two years, in part due to the elections in 2000. The second component, the "Partnership Fund for Roma" was established in January 2001 with the following objectives:
· To test ministerial strategies by supporting initiatives between (local) government organisations and the Roma community.
· To build the capacity of existing Roma NGOs and to stimulate the development of new Roma organisations in areas where none are operating
· To identify and support sustainable partnerships and innovative projects between Roma communities and local public authorities.
Out of 334 applications received, 40 projects covering most strategy sectors were selected and have been implemented in the course of 2001-2002.
     Local activists and the international community welcomed the much-delayed entry into force of Law 48/2002, as a comprehensive and potentially powerful tool against discrimination. The Law includes a broad definition of discrimination on grounds of ethnicity, and covers equality in economic activity, in terms of employment and profession, access to legal, administrative and public health services, access to other services, goods and facilities, access to education and to public places, and the right to personal dignity.
     Promotion of Minority Rights
     The Government Strategy includes components intended to ensure the right to preserve and promote ethnic identity. It provides for programmes to "reinvigorate and assert the Roma ethnic identity," especially in the spheres of culture, language, education, training, and public life. Through the Strategy, the Government states its commitment to cultural diversity for the benefit of the whole society, aiming at the exclusion of extremism that promotes intolerance and ethnic hatred. The responsible co-ordinating structure is the National Office for Roma, within the Ministry of Public Information.
     An analysis of the projects for Roma communities from Romania implemented during 1990-2000 mentions that "the fields of activity of Roma NGOs are reflecting the main areas of interest for the Roma community." Almost 50 percent of NGO projects have a cultural component, according to this report. The projects promoted by Roma NGOs focus on the recovery of local history by organising training for young Roma, which are important from the perspective of the building of Roma identity. Some Roma activists perceive the issue as an important tool for authentic integration of the Roma in the larger community, while preserving distinctive traditions and language.
     The cooperative relationship has to be not only at the national level but also between Western and Eastern Europe, between the centre and periphery within the EU and outside of it. The right of solidarity can be a new way of approaching the issue in a ideal way of solving problems. The reality is different because the starting values are not appropriate, and the Moral and Ethic are not prevalent values of EU enlargement, the economic interest is prevalent.
     The drafting of the strategy for the improvement of the Roma situation is one example of the resistance of social forces against the exploitation of capitalism, especially his neo-liberal variant.
     The fact that western experts are eligible for the coordination position of Phare projects is the reflection of the neo-liberal view and power politics of center imposing on the periphery. The Phare funds are not well distributed and specially because of the difference of wages and in our case study more than 50% of Phare project was used for the western expertise and administration. For this reason the government and the Roma civil society decided to make the strategy without foreign support, to protest against this asymmetry and it was a success but only for the design of the strategy. In order to implement the strategy with the Roma civil society participation a new protocol between the Roma Civil Society and the government is needed.
     So, the differences of wages is also a big problem because in our Romanian Phare evaluation more than half of the project came back in the pockets of Western experts and 10% was only for the manager of this project. This provides a lot of tensions and a high sense of social injustice. Romanian experts weren't encouraged to work and collaborate with western consultants and experts because the difference of wages was two hight. The foreign coordinator recieved on one month 120 times more than a romanian expert, romany experts might to work voluntary because they are representants of Roma Civil Society. The National Office for Roma has only two payed roma experts and they didn't benefit of the foreign expertise and the project was extended 6 month instead of transfering expertise and funds for this new body.
     This big social injustice just destroyed the embrionic relationship between the tyrany of external experts and the romanian and roma experts but created an aggregated interest of Roma and non-Roma civil society to resist to this exploitation of man by man, and to reflect on the potential project against embedded neoliberalism, the actual hegemonic project of the Politic European Society.

     CONCLUSIONS
     In order to find a global governance system involving the protection of minority rights it is necessary to have a common denominator of sustainable development and human security for all actors of international system. Right to development has to be the key word, as an integrative concept of all human needs for the humanity as a whole. For this we need a new worldview based on a common vision for all of as. We have to start with the local level because many of the problems facing Roma occur at local level and the keys to the solutions of these problems have to be found at local level. Within Phare programme for to improving the Roma situation in Romania a partnership was created between local authorities and Roma but not on the majority of 40 projects from Romania. Different examples of successful Roma projects fulfilled three main conditions and one important lesson we learned from the drafting of the strategy: Roma participation, Integrative approach, Intensive co-operation with authorities are the conditions and the inadequacy of mirror imaging which is the most important lesson. Recruting Western experts who know little Romania and have only the vaguest idea of the Romany problem, even if such individuals sincerely identify themselves as benevolent agents of change, is obviously a mistake. Consultants and experts are trained to solve routine prob-lems within routine procedures. They are not trained to reflect creatively on the emergence and stabilization of the complex institutions of Romany protection. Ordinary experts' training, therefore, is not adequate to the extraordinary problems faced by the manager of a strategy for improvement of Roma situation. In Romania, as everywhere else, a strategy cannot succeed without attention to social context, local infrastructure, professional skills, logistic capacities, and political support. A foreign expert cannot help without a strong cooperation with government partners and Roma civil society, so knowledge alone is never enough. The fact that western experts are eligible for the coordination position is the reflection of the neo-liberal view. For this reason the government and the Roma civil society decided to make the strategy without foreign support, to protest against this asymmetry and it was a success but only for the design of the strategy. In order to implement the strategy with the Roma civil society participation a new protocol between the civil Society and the government is needed.
     So, the differences of wages is also a big problem because in our Romanian Phare evaluation more than half of the project came back in the pockets of Western experts and 10% was only for the manager of this project as we evaluated before. This provides a lot of tensions and a high sense of social injustice and for this reason Romanian experts weren't encouraged to work and collaborate with western consultants and experts. The EU and the US should jointly create and fund a Strategy Centre, to be located at a prominent political sciences school or a major public-policy school with a strong international program. Such a centre-which can be focused initially on Roma but might eventually assume a wider mandate-could provide a forum for sustainable development program managers with extensive field experience to take time off for reflection, to write monographs in which they distil lessons from the projects they have been involved with, and to make proposals for project selection, project design, partner selection, and the improvement of communications between headquar-ters and field officers. The ultimate goal of such a centre would be to provide, in effect Romany and Romanian consultants and experts. This will avoid that foreign funding should be channelled toward projects with strong domestic allies and weak domestic enemies. This includes allies and enemies in civil society as well as in the public sector. So foreign support should be given to efforts that combine top-down and bottom-up features, working with both the regulators and the regulated. What is equally required is a good deal of commitment to a morality which will enable us to look ahead, to invest into the future, to widen the limits of an immediate self-centred horizon, to transcend the boundaries of one's nation and generation. The preventive approach in order to prevent the conflicts of Globalisation is not easy, which creates institutional, authority and distribution crises because the actual global governance can't accommodate the biggest contradiction between the two logics of globalisation, the logic of global capital characterised by individualistic and corporate profit and self interest, and the logic of global Civilization designed to provide a good life for humanity, so "the continuing gap between Unity and Integration in the contemporary world order foreshadows further tensions and conflicts until its institutions and processes of governance can accommodate both the universalising and the localizing effects of globalisation and both logics of globalisation" , in other words the logic of private sector and the logic of public sector, by democratisation of actual European governance and structural foreign policy .
     Knowing the incredible complexity of the Romany problem - this is a de facto denial of their membership application .It could mean, though, on the other hand, that the European Union would change its inner structure (becoming, maybe, multi-speed polity) in order to accommodate new countries with various problems.
     Can the Roma Civil Society be the opportunity for a new enlargement paradigm was the principal question of this thesis? After analysing the bottom-up Strategy for the improvement of the Roma situation from Romania we can conclude that Roma Civil Society, but not isolated, can be the good opportunity for a new paradigm of enlargement and the protocol signed by the Roma Social Party and Social Democratic Party from Romania can challenge the actual paradigm of enlargement dominated by free market and laissez -faire philosophy. Perspectives for a new EU paradigm of Roma integration can start from the new perspective of Council of Europe, but trying to give more importance to economic and social rights, specially the right to have a property. To a large extent this was in response to the perceived need to ensure that the social dimension of European internal market is not neglected in the rush to economic unity and rationalisation. It might also be in part an answer to the excesses of the free market and laissez - faire philosophy that dominate and are still part of the actual hegemonic project of embedded neo-liberalism. The Council of Europe must play an important role in improving the legal status, the level of equality and the living conditions of the Roma, in establishing a European Roma Consultative Forum, in initiating A Charter on the Fundamental Rights of Roma and in funding the institution of a European Roma Ombudsman and a European Roma study and training centre.
The cooperative relationship has to be not only at the national level but also between Western and Eastern Europe, between the centre and periphery within the EU and outside of it. The right of solidarity can be a new way of approaching the issue. Also the right to have a property can change the neo-liberal hegemonic position in Europe.
     Why Cooperation?
     Forty-five years of a command economy dominated by a one-party socialist state limited economic growth, grass-roots democratic participation, and political liberty. It resulted in a serious economic, social, and political crisis and led to the inescapable conclusion that socialism was not the appropriate system for modernization in the region, let's hope on the virtues of cooperation for finding the third way in a neo-Gramcian perspective. Because there are several forms of state and the national interest, the raison d'etat, cannot be separated from society, as it depends on the configuration of social forces at the state level. Gramsci's concept of the integral state is analyt-ically useful for the conceptualisation of the relation between state and society. Social forces are more important that the state the principal actor of International World order because history is the result of constant struggle between social forces and is, therefore, con-stantly subject to change. European integration is no exception to this. While "embedded neo-liberalism" is hegemonic at present, this does not imply that it will also be so in the future. Highlighting the possibility of change was the first step towards ensuring actual change. The second step was an analysis of the potential forces and projects behind a counter-hegemonic bloc, which would come mainly from trade unions, but organised at the European level, and those social democratic parties, which might return to their traditional policies. Significant would be the participation of social movements that have a shared resent-ment against the logic of capitalist exploitation. This would include the variety of identity and social movements (ethnic, nationalist, reli-gious, gender, environmental) that have a common material basis and thus a potentially wide social basis. It will be impor-tant for these counter-forces to put forward a coherent strategy, capable of rivalling "embedded neo-liberalism", especially in difficult time of transition. This issue is crucial because the collective will of a counter-hegemonic movement, that lacks an inter-nal logic and social basis, could become dispersed and scattered into infinity of individual wills or identities reduced to separate and conflicting paths like in the example of Phare Project for the improvement of the Roma situation from Romania.
     So we need cooperation but in more trustful and moral way, based on the three activities virtues of "globalism" to bring unity trough solidarity: active communication for understanding, sharing of resources and mutual aid in difficult time. Only in this way we can bridge the gape between the elites's hegemonic project and the anti-hegemonic ongoing project. We don't have an alternative to cooperation and to integrative approach of the new theory of knowledge. The cooperative relationship is the relation for the future at all levels and between the principal paradigms of Knowledge: of Natural Sciences, of Social Sciences, of Ethics and Applied sciences. The relation is the principal unit of analyses of international relations and this is the big shift of paradigm at the deeper structure of analyses.
     This paper 's hypothesis was supported by some of last years ' developments in the policies of the CEEC and the EU on the Romany issue (with some of the CEEC implementing policies of mimicry and the EU member states trying to block the Roma in Central and Eastern Europe, not to support their European integration). In the short-term and medium-term period, the EU might try to have double standards of security, therefore, to avoid a reconfiguration of its boundaries that could have a considerable negative impact on its internal security, while promoting external security strategies in order to avoid significant Romany outflows from the Central and Eastern Europe. Countries such as Romania would have a hard time trying to convince the EU member states of the benign character of their Romany problem in comparison with the real threat of the European Integration the "social fracture". For a long period of time, in a sustainable way, we need a common vision for all Roma from Europe, a common strategy of all international actors of international system and a new functional structure to deal with this new type of cooperative relationship between institutions and Roma community, Roma Office for European Information would be a good starting in the right direction.
So, at the Surface structure - minority rights are evaluated, as a threat for security because the nation state is not able to deal with group rights, but at the deeper structure the "social fracture" of globalisation is the real threat for national and global security.
     We hope that the answer of the questions posed to EU experts would help on the achieving more social justice. For the moment these questions are without answer because the economic interest is prevalent, on this stage of European Construction dominated by embedded neo-liberalism (see annex 3)
     We need new instruments of understanding the social reality, new methods of investigation, integrative ones for finding solutions for actual "social fracture": new Political and Civil Society entities able to deal with the real threats of globalisation, together in a cooperative relationship and specially the deconstruction of the variable of a superpower, replacing military factor with integrative research and educational one.

     Annexes
     Annex 1
     There are five interrelated categories of collective risk, uncertainty and instability: economic, armed conflict, political, societal, ecologic.
Five interrelated categories indicate the broad character and implications of collective future risks of globalisation:
     o Risks of armed conflict, connected with external military inter-ventions, interstate wars, civil wars, and other forms of large-scale violence, as well as national and international terrorism.
     o Risks resulting from the political destabilisation of governments, the sources of which may be internal-like revolutions and upris-ings, separatist movements, ethnic problems, and the ineffi-ciency of national and international political institutions-or external-such as unforeseen and unpredictable political actions of governments that adversely affect other states.
     o Economic risks, the sources of which are widespread, such as the malfunctioning of the economic system and recessions in key countries; defaults by major debtors; adverse and unexpected consequences of technological changes; errors in major economic decisions; the collapse of international coop-eration regimes (especially of those vital to the global econ-omy, like the international financial system); the sudden imposition of limitations on the availability of resources; and economic warfare.
     o Societal risks caused by such diverse factors as large population increases; mass migrations; large-scale movements of refugees; social developments that overstretch a state's capacity to pro-vide adequate health and educational services; and ethnic, national, cultural, and religious problems.
     o Ecological risks engendered by the general deterioration of the environment, sudden environmental crises, and natural catastrophes.
      As well as identifying the sources of collective risk, we must also un-derstand and take into account the sources of risk and insta-bility that affect individual countries. Many of these countries may require international assistance in their risk manage-ment efforts. (THE FUTURE OF THE GLOBAL GOVERNANCE, MIHALY SINAI, 1994, UNITED STATES INSTITUTE OF PEACE PRESS, P.259)
     Annex 2
     Globalisation of economies as loss of jobs, with collapse of some industries producing structural unemployment for a rather high percentage of the population of blue collar workers producing an anti-political movement of the newly emerging parties of the extreme right
     Globalisation of communication as a cultural shock, leading to attempts at the re-formation and re-assertion of national or ethnic-religious self-identity, even in its extreme forms of fundamentalisms - a clear adverse reaction to the demonstrative effect of Western consumption societies
Globalisation of World institutions as their activisation in crisis management reflected in success and failures of UN and/or NATO missions or those of the global monetary institutions, and leading with the demonisation of the IMF and other global actors.
     Globalisation of democratisation as both positive and negative responses, i.e. promotions of democracy or Reverse Waves (in Huntington's term), Authoritarian Renewals or façade democracies. (Colin Hay and David Marsh, Demystifying Globalization, 2000, Polis University of Birmingham, p.133)
     Annex 3
     1. What is the working definition for Civil Society from EU perspective and which kind of organisations or institutions can receive the EU support (Phare projects) and if the EU has a strategy in this context. What is the aim of developing the Civil society on the context of enlargement of UE and globalisation.
     2. What are the positive and negatives aspects of Phare projects for improvement of the Roma situation from Romania (report cost/benefits)
     3. Recommendations and perspectives in order to avoid the dichotomy losers -winners of this projects. (win-win scenarios of real integration)
     4. Solutions for using Romany and Romanian consultancy for a better repartition of financial resources from Phare projects for the benefit of target group
     5. What you can do to improve this situation of asymmetry, starting from the lessons learned.
(Big differences of wages..., eventually European projects for exchange of experience and offering jobs on the EU area for Roma with contract, to stimulate the migration and help Roma to integrate in the European space offering their skills because of the difference of wages... the strategy of Ministry of Foreign Affaires is to export workers way not Roma which are good and skilled workers).

     Back