» Languages » English

Dr. Galluccio’s interview on climate change negotiation process – Paris 2015

admineanam — Tue, 15 Dec 2015 10:40:21 +0000

Mauro Galluccio’s interview on the climate change meeting in Paris is up on the BBC website. Check it out here, 00:26!

It focuses on the importance of the national ratification and implementation processes of the agreement reached in Paris by 195 Nations on 12 December 2015. Moreover, to be successful, environment and science agreements require sustainable cooperation among the parties. It seems that science diplomacy is increasingly seen as a strategic tool that can mediate issues in foreign policy and aid difficult negotiations by enabling dialogue and successful engagements of third parties. However, science diplomacy cannot help without coordinating negotiating efforts that support deep understanding in the ways people think, feel, and act at both the individual and collective levels.

We cannot influence a world we do not understand!

We cannot influence geographical areas, countries, people and categories if we do not acknowledge and appreciate their frames of reference, negotiating styles, their culture, belief systems, Sacred Values, needs and motivations!

The post Dr. Galluccio’s interview on climate change negotiation process – Paris 2015 appeared first on .

“Handbook of International Negotiation” out now

admineanam — Tue, 09 Dec 2014 23:04:56 +0000

We are proud and honored to announce the worldwide release of our latest book, entitled « Handbook of International Negotiation: Interpersonal, Intercultural and Diplomatic Perspectives », via Springer Publishing.

Edited and directed by Mauro Galluccio, Ph.D., President of EANAM, this work is a collaborative approach to international negotiation, conflict management and preventive diplomacy. The originality of this volume lies in its cross-disciplinary approach, aimed at converging contributions from experts in the fields of Social, Cognitive and Behavioral Psychology, Neurobiology, Emotional intelligence and Regulation, or even Diplomacy, towards an innovative study of peace and negotiation.

This book is targeted at international peace and conflict management negotiators, decision-makers, politicians, students and scholars in peace studies. With a particular stress on actual and instructive cases like North Korea, Lebanon or Afghanistan, it offers leading-edge concepts and science-based models for fostering alternatives to violent and armed conflicts. As such, the Handbook of International Negotiation proposes in-depth tailored training as a solution aimed at provoking behavioral changes in participants, through different scenarios and situations; indeed, training as it is conceived nowadays is not sustainable if it does not take into account interpersonal dynamics and communities’ behavior. We believe that, as a matter of fact, the real challenge for mankind is not that of flying to Mars and conquering the space, or digging deeper into the earth to conquer new oilfields, but rather of simply walking together on this planet Earth, trying to safeguard our common humanity and dignity.

The seven key areas of the book are divided into 30 chapters, written by top-ranking contributors and leading researchers, discussing the following range of topics:

Section I: Decisions Making Approaches to Negotiation
- Representative Decision-Making: Challenges to Democratic Peace Theory (by Esra Cuhadar and Daniel Druckman)
- Tacit Knowledge Awareness and its Role in Improving the Decision-Making Process in International Negotiations (by E. Thomas Dowd)
- A Psychotherapist’s View of Decision-Making: Implications for Peaceful Negotiations (by Donald Meichenbaum, Ph.D.)
- Moral Disengagement in “War Fever”: How can we resist? (by Alfred L. McAlister Ph.D. and Brittanie Wilczak M.P.H.)
Section II: Re-framing Approaches to Negotiation
- The biology of Cooperative Decision-Making: Neurobiology to International Relations (by Nicholas D. Wright M.R.C.P., Ph.D.)
- Psychological Dynamics of Insight: Relevance to International Negotiation (by Neil Sargent and Andrea Bartoli)
- Why is it so difficult to Resolve Intractable Conflicts Peacefully? A Sociopsychological Explanation (by Daniel Bar-Tal, Eran Halperin and Ruthie Pliskin)
- Dignity in Negotiation: its Transforming Power (by Barry Hart Ph.D.)
Section III: Conflict Management and International Negotiation
- Negotiating Conflict Transformations (by Louis Kriesberg)
- The Evolution of Readiness Theory (by Dean G. Pruitt)
- Why is Mediation so Hard? The case of Syria (by Chester A. Crocker, Fen Osler Hampson, Pamela Aall and Simon Palamar)
- Underpinning Conflict Prevention by International Cooperation (by Cornelia E. Nauen and Ursula Hillbrand)
Section IV: Emotions Regulation in Negotiation
- Improving Negotiation Effectiveness with Skills of Emotional Competence (by Carolyn Saarni)
- International Negotiation and Emotional Intelligence (by David R. Caruso)
- From Conflict to Peace Through Emotional Regulation and Cooperation (by Felicity de Zulueta)
- Mindfulness-based Training for Negotiators: Fostering Resilience in the Face of Stress (by Mauro Galluccio and Jeremy D. Safran)
Section V: Cognitive and Behavioural Approach to Negotiation
- A Cognitive Insight on Cooperation and Conflict (by Mauro Galluccio and Aaron T. Beck)
- Impediments and Strategies in Negotiating: A Cognitive Therapy Model (by Robert L. Leahy Ph.D.)
- Negotiating in the World of Mixed Beliefs and Value Systems: A Compassion-focused Model (by Paul Gilbert Ph.D., O.B.E.)
- Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Inspiring Values in the Planning and Management of Lebanon National Conflicts Resolution: A Brief Essay (by Aimée Karam)
Section VI: The Intercultural Dimension of International Negotiation
- Reflections on the Cultural Contexts of Conflict Resolution via Truth and Reconciliation Processes (by Anthony J. Marsella Ph.D.)
- On Instinctive Human Peace Versus War (by David P. Barash)
- Beyond Impasse: Addressing Sacred Values in International Political Negotiations (by Nichole Argo Ph.D. and Jeremy Ginges Ph.D.)
- Developing a Global Community: A Social Psychological Perspective (by Morton Deutsch Ph.D., Eric C. Marcus Ph.D. and Sarah J. Brazaitis Ph.D.)
Section VII: Diplomacy and International Negotiation
- An Inquiry on War and Peace: Negotiating Common Ground Processes (by Cardinal Renato Raffaele Martino)
- Negotiating Partners: Friends or Foes? (by Cameron Hume)
- Environment and Science: Finding Common Ground Through International Agreements. An Insider’s View of Negotiation Processes (by Richard J. Smith)
- Micro-negotiation in the Security Sector Advising Context: A Case Study from Afghanistan (by Erik J. Leklem)
- Development Cooperation and Negotiation in Practice (by Gerardus Gielen)
- Diplomacy Meets Science: Negotiating Responsible and Inclusive Growth (by Mauro Galluccio and Laura Vivani)

If you wish to find out more and buy the book, feel free to visit the dedicated page on our website or the page of Springer, our publisher.

The post “Handbook of International Negotiation” out now appeared first on .

Adapting Decision-Making Processes to the real world in which we all live

Mauro Galluccio — Fri, 20 Dec 2013 19:26:53 +0000

Adapting Decision-Making Processes to the real world in which we all live[1]

Mauro Galluccio, PhD

“…The most important topic on earth: world peace (…) I am talking about genuine peace, the kind of peace that makes life on earth worth living, the kind that enables men and nations to grow and to hope and to build a better life for their children – not merely peace for Americans but peace for all men and women – not merely peace in our time but peace for all time (…) Let us focus instead on a more practical, more attainable peace– based not on a sudden revolution in human nature but on a gradual evolution in human institutions–on a series of concrete actions and effective agreements, which are in the interest of all concerned. There is no single, simple key to this peace, no grand or magic formula to be adopted by one or two powers. Genuine peace must be the product of many nations, the sum of many acts. It must be dynamic, not static, changing to meet the challenge of each new generation (…) For peace is a process – a way of solving problems.”

President John F. Kennedy, Washington, D.C., 10 June 1963

As President Kennedy stated in his famous speech cited above, no nation is able to impose peace, no matter how strong it is. Peace must instead be the product of many nations (without, however, sidelining direct concerned actors). Could we enter a new era of conscious compassionate multilateralism? Maybe it is too early to speak of sustainable multilateralism until the main international actors reach a cognitive and political awareness, and can “digest” this multipolar world in which we all live. A world as it is now, and not as it should be, or could have been.

An important metacognitive function humans have is that of decentring. This is the ability of human beings to assess interactive sequences and to assume (and remember) someone else’s point of view in the relational context (Aquilar & Galluccio, 2008, 2009; Falcone, Marraffa, Carcione, 2003; Di Maggio, Semerari, Carcione, Nicolo’, Procacci, 2007). Understanding others’ values and opinions and mental states as a whole, gives leaders a strategic advantage. Everybody from the bottom to the top of the pyramid of power should be engaged in interpersonal negotiations to achieve a common ground from where to negotiate and mediate, with respect, mutual interests. No more one-way negotiation but a mix of intrapersonal and interpersonal negotiations. The world is interdependent and we need to be able to manage the interdependence through peace negotiations, with political and psychological strategies, in strengthening international cooperation to solve common problems. Alliances’ capacity building is more important in this historical period than ever before and we think that international negotiations should also help to build up sustainable working relationships. The way political leaders, negotiators, and mediators will manage these relationships is of great importance in order to foster international comprehensive cooperation and common problem-solving attitudes and behaviors. Otherwise, peace will continue to lose precisely its most important operational modality: that of solving problems. In the world there are still too many people suffering or dying for causes that are easily treatable or through violent conflicts. In time of crisis procedures are important and useful but not enough to handle complex situations. Procedural thinking style is good for a well ordered world. In time of crisis complexity is increased and we need complex mental tools to adapt our decision-making processes to the real world. We need to relate on our tacit knowledge and experience. We need leaders with a comprehensive vision of the future. Ending conflicts is just one of the moral imperatives to be achieved through international global negotiations. But, until we help to resolve problems around the globe, we will continue to be selectively and morally disengaged from the real world in which we all live.

[1]Revised excerpt from Galluccio (2011), in Aquilar, Galluccio (Eds.) (2011), Psychological and Political Strategies for Peace Negotiations. New York: Springer.

The post Adapting Decision-Making Processes to the real world in which we all live appeared first on .

A Social Cognitive Approach to International Relations

Mauro Galluccio — Fri, 20 Dec 2013 19:13:36 +0000

A Social Cognitive Approach to International Relations[1]

Mauro Galluccio, PhD

Our mission and current researches and studies foresee the development of an interdisciplinary approach to the study of political and diplomatic sciences and International Relations, and specifically to the study of interpersonal negotiations, as the main mechanism for preventing, managing, solving, and transforming conflicts. We are concentrated on knowing more about how to really master interacting cognitive and emotional processes to shape judgments and adaptive decisions in providing “operational connections” between different disciplines.

Everybody agrees that peace processes cannot be nurtured by force. They can be better achieved by a process of mutual understanding. It was Gian Battista Vico who said: “For when man understands, he extends his mind to comprehend things; but when he does not understand, he makes them out of himself, and by transforming himself, becomes them” (Vico, 1744; 2000:160). Unfortunately, the world today is more complex and difficult to understand. We, therefore, need complex mental tools to face these realities. The challenges to peace that lie ahead of us have been, in some cases, unresolved from many decades. The world is geopolitically fragmented and the “division” of the great powers’ areas of influence is an “ordered memory” of the past. It is difficult to think globally while facing challenges at a micro level capable of influencing the macro level, including regional disorders that do not display clear “situated” enemies and targets. This “confused” situation is reinforced by a modern paradox: an exponential and incontrollable growth of political technical communication tools that have been developing at the expense and detriment of a human communication and in general of a correct information flux around the world. As a result, we often seem to be caught by surprise by the way that events unfold, as well as their speed. Unfortunately, international actors seem to display a lack, or rigidity of leadership. We are witnessing difficulties to master and shape international events through this “mysterious” political construct called global governance, where main international actors seem to have worries on negotiating the “common translation and interpretation” of it (Eco, 2003). This brings discordant and asymmetric beliefs and behaviours on how to structure international Institutions, to set up mechanisms to handle the complexity of political relations, to give stability to working relationships, and to facilitate negotiating processes in order to “regulate” common international interests among states and other international actors.

The psychological social cognitive approach we use in our theoretical framework (Aquilar & Galluccio, 2008), in partnership with distinguished personalities from other disciplines, could help in widening, and improving, through specific validated training programs, the understanding of negotiating beliefs and relational abilities of negotiators. It is not easy to face conditions of uncertainty and ambiguity, and it could be a strategic advantage to helping to reduce the risks of negotiation failure due to psychological characteristics of actors that could thwart negotiators’ interactions in related contextual situations. Even most enduring alliances in the field of international relations are under strain because of events and policies (sometimes absence or lack of cooperation) and tools deployed to face them. Thinking is understood to be an embodied process: we know things not just through our heads, but also through our actions, and our bodily-felt experience. Thinking, feeling, and acting are embodied, and all essays to understand behaviours and decision-making processes without taking into account cognitive, metacognitive, emotional, motivational, and behavioural processes of actors could be deemed to fail in the international arena, as well in all other contexts. This should be considered as a main political priority to be pursued in this century in the field of international relations if we want to improve the well-being of populations around the globe adapting our decision making processes to contextual complex situations.

[1]Revised excerpt from Galluccio (2011), in Aquilar, Galluccio (Eds.) (2011), Psychological and Political Strategies for Peace Negotiations. New York: Springer.

The post A Social Cognitive Approach to International Relations appeared first on .

An excellent review

Mauro Galluccio — Mon, 02 Dec 2013 18:46:55 +0000

An excellent review of the book Psychological and Political Strategies for Peace Negotiation - Almost Everything You Need to Know About Peace Negotiation.

Has been published in PsychCritiques, published on-line, by the American Psychological Association, reviewed by

Anthony J. Marsella

Reference: PsycCritiques
August 24, 2011, Vol. 56, No. 34, Article 8

Almost Everything You Need to Know About Peace Negotiation

A Review of

Psychological and Political Strategies for Peace Negotiation: A Cognitive Approach
by Francesco Aquilar and Mauro Galluccio (Eds.)

New York, NY: Springer Science + Business Media, 2011. 258 pp. ISBN 978-1-4419-7429-7. $129.00

doi: 10.1037/a0024314

Reviewed by

Anthony J. Marsella

This 16-chapter edited volume should be required reading for all negotiators, educators, researchers, and activists concerned for “peace negotiation” and related topics (e.g., national and international conflict resolution, interpersonal and marital conflicts). I offer this ringing endorsement because the editors of Psychological and Political Strategies for Peace Negotiation: A Cognitive Approach, Francesco Aquilar and Mauro Galluccio, have assembled a sterling group of contributors who address a broad spectrum of topics that encompass psychological, social, and political considerations in political negotiation.

The chapter contributors come from numerous countries (e.g., Canada, France, Germany, Lebanon, Russia, Serbia, Scotland, Turkey), and they represent a number of different specialty areas (e.g., biological ecology, clinical psychology, international relations, political science, psychiatry, sociology). All are published specialists in peace negotiation and conflict resolution.

In today’s global era our lives have become increasingly interdependent. Events in distant lands now often have immediate and profound implications for everyone. We are, indeed, the fabled “global village” that Marshall McLuhan (1962) wrote about almost a half-century ago. One outcome of our global era is that conflicts—ranging from minor disputes to chronic intractable military violence and wars among nations and different ethnopolitical groups—place all of our lives and well-being in jeopardy. The tightly woven web of international relations leaves little latitude for escape from a host of destructive consequences. Efforts must be made to address these conflicts in substantive and meaningful ways, and the current volume goes a long way toward meeting this goal because of both its breadth and substance.

I found each chapter to broaden my thinking about the many nuances and complexities of peace and conflict resolution. From the opening chapter by Howard Gardner (multiple intelligences) to the closing chapter by Francesco Aquilar (use of social cognitive therapy from individuals to nations), the reader is treated to a range of conceptual models, empirical research, intervention strategies, and informed opinions on the changes needed to improve peace negotiations.

Imagine a volume on peace negotiation that gives rich discussion on so many issues: emotion, communication, and compassion (e.g., Paul Gilbert, Carolyn Saarni); going beyond reliance on conventional appeals to logic (e.g., Robert Leahy); tacit knowledge (Thomas Dowd and Angela Roberts Miller); escalation images (e.g., Guy Faure); pre-encounter communication (e.g., Dean Pruitt); limits of science and sustainability (e.g., Cornelia Nauen); constraints and limitations from constituents (e.g., Druckman, Çuhadar, Beriker, and Celik); and the need for special training of peace negotiators (e.g., Olivera Zikic). The chapter by Meichenbaum summarizes a score of thinking errors that often occur in negotiation (e.g., stereotypes, seeking consistency, attribution errors); the chapter by Karam on Lebanon offers one of the best analyses of an actual peace negotiation that I have read; and the chapters by Galluccio and by Kremenyuk offer inspiring visions for the future for peace negotiation and world peace.

I do, however, have a few suggestions. As a cultural psychologist I would suggest more explicit attention be given to ethnocultural considerations. I say “explicit” because many of the chapters are sensitive to the ethnocultural differences of the negotiating parties, and they address these differences via discussions of emotion, compassion, histories, thinking styles, and so forth. However, I am speaking here about the possibility of focusing specifically on the topic of ethnopolitical considerations via discussions of alternative cultural constructions of reality (e.g., Avruch & Vejarano, 2002; Marsella, 2005, 2007).

Ethnocultural differences have always been a bane in conflict negotiation. For example, in discussing the example of truth and reconciliation processes, Avruch and Vejarano (2001, 2002), wrote:

Most of the truth and truth and reconciliation commissions covered in the literature have worked (when they do) in Christian countries, and have recourse to broadly (if not perfectly) shared Christian values. But any attention to culture should alert us to the recognition that such notions as justice, truth, forgiveness, reconciliation, and accountability—to name a few—are always socially constructed and culturally constituted. Research in conflict resolution has already established different modalities for Islamic and “Western” cultures around such key ideas as justice, peace, and reconciliation—and contrition and forgiveness—and there is no reason to think that cultural differences stop there. (Avruch & Vejarano, 2002, p. 43)

In my work on ethnocultural considerations, I have noted that there are profound differences across ethnocultural groups in the perception, processing, and storage of information about the world across verbal, imagistic, emotional, proprioceptive, visceral, and total body modalities. What is important here is that, too often, Western approaches to reality construction emphasize the verbal/rational linear thinking approach.

Consider our many and varied psychotherapies: They depend heavily upon verbalization—using words to communicate complex ideas, feelings, and memories. However, many groups do not code reality in the verbal mode. As a result, the use of verbal channels to change behavior may be limited.

I can recall a failed therapy occasion with a Filipino plantation worker in Hawaii who thanked me for my efforts after a number of counseling sessions. He said, “Thank you, doctor, you are a good person, but I still don’t feel good.” He did not feel good because I failed to access the many channels of his codification of experience and the rich and detailed material that was there and that needed to be addressed via other methods beyond talking.

He was, as all of us are, a whole person—body, mind, and spirit. I had to learn from this case that I had failed to tap all the modes (i.e., image, emotion, proprioceptive, visceral) in which his experience had been encoded and was being experienced as part of his adjustment. The power of accessing all modes of experience among different ethnocultural groups cannot be ignored or dismissed in something as critical as peace negotiations.

I wish to commend the editors and authors of Psychological and Political Strategies for Peace Negotiation: A Cognitive Approach for an exceptional effort that does much to advance the area of peace negotiation and conflict resolution. I recommend this volume heartily as a definite advance in our knowledge and a definite contribution to peace and justice: not to be missed.

References

Avruch, K., & Vejarano, B. (2001). Truth and reconciliation commissions: A review essay and annotated bibliography. Social Justice: Anthropology, Peace, and Human Rights, 2, 47–108.
Avruch, K., & Vejarano, B. (2002). Truth and reconciliation commissions: A review essay and annotated bibliography. OJPCR: The Online Journal of Peace and Conflict Resolution, 4, 37–76.
Marsella, A. (2005). Culture and conflict: Understanding, negotiating, and reconciling conflicting constructions of reality. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 29, 651–673. doi:10.1016/j.ijintrel.2005.07.012
Marsella, A. (2007, August). The cultural contexts of conflict, truth, and reconciliation. Paper presented at the annual convention of the American Psychological Association, San Francisco, CA.
McLuhan, M. (1962). The Gutenberg galaxy: The making of typographic man. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: University of Toronto Press.

The post An excellent review appeared first on .

Psychological and political strategies for peace negotiation

Mauro Galluccio — Mon, 02 Dec 2013 18:43:09 +0000

Psychological and Political Strategies for Peace Negotiation: A Cognitive Approach

October 27, 2011
United Nations North Lawn Building
First Avenue and 46th Street
Conference Room 6

Welcome: Archbishop Francis Chullikatt

Introduction: His Eminence Cardinal Renato Martino

Panel Presentations:
Mauro Galluccio, Ph.D.
Professor Elizabeth Defeis, Esq.

PROGRAM CO-SPONSORS

Permanent Observer Mission of the Holy See to the United Nations
Path to Peace Foundation

Program

Welcome: Archbishop Francis Chullikatt, Apostolic Nuncio, Permanent Observer of the Holy See

Introductions: His Eminence Cardinal Renato Martino, President Emeritus of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace:

Panel Presentations:

Psychological and Political Strategies for Peace Negotiations: A Cognitive Approach
Mauro Galluccio, Ph.D. President of the European Association for Negotiation and Mediation

Peacebuilding, R2P and Negotiation
Professor Elizabeth Defeis, Esq., Professor of Law at Seton Hall University School of Law

Discussion
Comments by the panelists on the presentations and solicitation of questions and comments from the audience.

Concluding Remarks
Archbishop Francis Chullikatt, Apostolic Nuncio, Permanent Observer of the Holy See

The post Psychological and political strategies for peace negotiation appeared first on .

The mutiny on the bounty

Mauro Galluccio — Mon, 02 Dec 2013 18:37:26 +0000

The mutiny on the Bounty:
Please do not let the European Union fall apart

We know that policy-makers and negotiators do not function in a social vacuum. Most international security decisions may depend upon interrelated situational elements together with a “supreme” goal (on the behalf of leaders) to be confirmed in the office. Decision-making processes, especially during crises period, may be more driven by wishful thinking, selfjustification, selective moral disengagement mechanisms, and destructive human emotions than it is by rational calculations of power.

In this historical period, it seems that the European Union leadership is suffering a major sickness. Take the example of Germany who is so proud to punish the “bad guys” that is delaying any decision about the euro zone talking about structural reforms in the future losing the sight of the present as it was smooth and secure and like the EURO is not collapsing.

Here we see the difficulty in making decisions by the German leadership provoked by our primal emotion: fear. We live in a complex and interconnected world were the complexity should be managed with the awareness that when we are experiencing a crisis even apparently meaningless events may provoke unwanted positive or negative domino effects. But leaders are called upon to decide at the right time.

I think Mrs. Merkel has gathered enough information to make a decision overcoming her prejudices and maybe what she needs is a good internal communication strategy to explain to Germans why united we will probably rescue, but divided not only will we certainly fail but we will put the so called peripheral actors in a situation where the mutiny will be the only chance they have for surviving.

This is instead the time to start a political negotiation among actors of the European Union to give a financial support to Member States in danger of default, strictly linked to reforms and serious tailored financial plans (because Italy could not be compared to Greece). A compromise is possible but Mrs. Merkel should make a decision today otherwise it will be too late and politicians will be overwhelmed by events.

Just a final thought: Could we provide a supportive service to politicians who make critical decisions that have widespread impact on the nation’s economic well-being? I think a political leader should include a cognitive-behavior therapist properly trained, as an integral member of their closest advisory team in order to improve decision-making processes.

The post The mutiny on the bounty appeared first on .

European union: an expiration date?

Mauro Galluccio — Mon, 02 Dec 2013 18:33:54 +0000

Loyalty to the European Union project has no expiration date:
Negotiating a closer tie among eurozone Countries

Financial crisis is serious and hard decisions should be made as soon as possible. Situations of structural uncertainty, an absence of effective central authority and decision rules, and stalemates in unilateral means of solving problems and resolving conflicts, among member states of the eurozone, are all conditions that call for more cooperation and integrated negotiated actions.

Among decisions the hardest one is certainly that of taking a political beleaguered direction towards a shifting of some of the spending and taxing sovereign powers from Member States of the Euro zone to an European Financial High Authority (and a sort of common collective responsibility for national debts) with the European Central Bank playing a more assertive and active regional supportive role. Governments, especially the big ones, should now demonstrate that they are not willing to put the Euro currency at risk and that they have a political strength to negotiate a deal over fiscal rules in the eurozone as a natural consequences of a project they launched officially in January 2002.

It is too good, for certain big Member States, just to take advantages of countries markets (even Mediterranean ones) enjoying the Euro currency and all the positive gains for national industries. However, it is guilty of greed to assist to the breakup of the eurozone, as they did not have shared responsibility of the success or failure of the Euro.

This told we cannot hide the fact that this crisis has been managed until now with fear and clumsy attitude and has been guided more by selfish and punitive behaviors than by real political and economic vision of the future aimed at restoring market confidence. Sad to say, this state of art has been showing a political void of leadership and a lack of solidarity, one of the main founding principles of the European project. Even going through the above mentioned steps towards a more integrated eurozone, this financial crisis and its bitter (mis)management and communication failure to explain reasons to the “European citizen” will certainly jeopardize the European Union political project. We need a transformative leadership process (Galluccio, 2011; in Aquilar & Galluccio, 2011) showing a structural political strength in making decisions in the eurozone and in the European Union as a whole. European politicians are called upon an era of political responsibility and technical coherence supported by a sustainable and improved decision-making process.

If they want to continue to play a zero-sum game in crisis situations, they should know that their bluff may be called upon and they will be held politically accountable. If European politicians really want to continue to pursue the European Union project, it is time they put their actions where their mouth is. In both good and bad times!

The post European union: an expiration date? appeared first on .