Talk:European Political Community

Introduced already in May 2022

The article currently says:

Macron officially presented the project at the meeting of the European Council on 23-24 June 2022.[1]

However, he already introduced the idea six weeks earlier, on May 10, according to https://presidence-francaise.consilium.europa.eu/en/news/speech-by-emmanuel-macron-at-the-closing-ceremony-of-the-conference-on-the-future-of-europe/. In my view, the brief mention in the June speech contains less detail than the May speech, so I would rather refer to the May speech and use – as the German article does – that date as the starting point of the EPC's history. ◅ Sebastian 07:31, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Participants

Some half-formed thoughts and questions on how we treat the issue of participation:

List of which individuals attended on behalf of each country would be great if it's been published. If it's anything like the European Council it will have been heads of state where these hold substantive executive power and heads of government for the rest, plus who exactly on behalf the EU? Were von der Leyen and Michel both there for the EU? Anyone else, e.g. Metsola? Were any countries represented by a foreign minister instead of a head of state/government?

Crucial point to make is that this seems intended by Macron and others to bring together just about everyone in Europe regardless of affiliation to EU, EEA, NATO etc, but deliberately excludes 🇷🇺Russia and its close ally 🇧🇾Belarus as the current European pariahs. It even includes two countries that have had armed clashes with each other within the last few weeks (🇦🇲Armenia and 🇦🇿Azerbaijan), and the always messy case of 🇽🇰Kosovo attending alongside 🇷🇸Serbia which still considers it part of its territory (and which some other attendees such as Spain don't recognise either).

Edge cases are the microstates. It's not clear to me why 🇱🇮Liechtenstein (population 39,000) was there but not 🇦🇩Andorra (79,000), 🇲🇨Monaco (36,000) or 🇸🇲San Marino (33,000). Were those three invited but didn't attend, or do they have some arrangement to be represented in foreign policy matters by e.g. Italy for San Marino?

Less surprising is the absence of 🇻🇦Vatican City as a sui generis, and the entities recognised by far fewer countries than recognise Kosovo: Northern Cyprus, Transnistria etc.

Unless I have missed something, the list here is a close overlap with membership of the long-established Council of Europe. CoE includes the three missing microstates, but excludes Kosovo and a separate seat at the table for the EU. Are those differences sufficient to explain why Macron didn't work through this existing institution, and have any journalists or commentators explored this question?

In summary:

1. Why was Liechtenstein there but not its three comparable peers?
2. What was the point of setting this up as a separate institution to the existing Council of Europe?
3. Which individuals attended?

Beorhtwulf (talk) 15:27, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Further to question 1, this webpage indicates Liechtenstein got an invitation as part of EFTA, which the other microstates are not part of. Beorhtwulf (talk) 16:20, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

1. Liechtenstein was invited due to EFTA membership. Other microstates were not invited.

2. CoE is mostly focused on democracy, rule of law and human rights. This organization will be focused on security, economy and other related matters.

3. That's a long list. 37.248.224.179 (talk) 21:37, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

San Marino will attend the next summit in Moldova on 1 June 2023 - https://twitter.com/MarosSefcovic/status/1616572585952550912 Dn9ahx (talk) 15:54, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Israel

I am reading from many sources Israel was invited. I have not found sources that confirm Israel's attendance. Anyone have sourced of confirmation? Erzan (talk) 11:40, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

According to https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/meetings/international-summit/2022/10/06/ Israel was not invited. If you take EU 27 + 17 countries listed there, it comes to 44 total, a figure which I have seen in other sources. Selfstudier (talk) 12:07, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 1 June 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 22:04, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

---

• European Political Community (2022) → European Political Community
• European Political Community → Deleted to make way for page move

– WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. The present-day organization, which is helding its second summit, is undeniably more notable than a failed proposed treaty which never saw the light of day (European Political Community (1952)). Per WP:ONEOTHER, keeping a dab page is not necessary, as hatnotes are already pointing to the correct location. Place Clichy (talk) 15:10, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

Note: pages with content, such as European Political Community, are ineligible to be new titles in move requests unless they, too, are dispositioned. European Political Community → Deleted to make way for page move was added to this request to meet that requirement. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^{put'er there} 18:16, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

• Move per nomination. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:54, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support. Super Ψ Dro 08:58, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

North Cyprus and Kazakhstan

@Archives908 why did you remove North Cyprus and Kazakhstan? What do you mean by “unnecessary”? 46.154.248.177 (talk) 06:39, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

This has been discussed here before. The states with limited recognition in Europe and Kazakhstan weren't even considered to participate in the EPC. Per WP:RELEVANCE guidelines, their inclusion adds no useful purpose to the understanding of the main topic. Archives908 (talk) 13:52, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Kosovo and North Cyprus both have representatives or delegations in the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and there are UN forces involved in their cases. EU themselves also have relations with the two, they even have diplomatic missions/program support offices in these states. Therefore North Cyprus’ case is not like the other states with limited recognition. I noticed that Kosovo is invited and listed there, so it’d be fair to place TRNC under appropriate section.

For Kazakhstan, I can understand if the consensus here is not to include it since it’s geographically further away from rest of the other European states; I had added it only because it’s also a post-Soviet state which has a territory in Europe, besides the Caucasus trio. 46.155.73.115 (talk) 17:09, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Invalid arguments. The EPC has nothing to do with the Council of Europe, therefore, your point is irrelevant. While the EU has made it repeatedly clear that it only recognizes the Republic of Cyprus. Once again, per WP:RELEVANCE policies, their inclusion has no useful purpose to the topic of the EPC. Archives908 (talk) 22:27, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

It was also mentioned here in another discussion that the CoE and the EPC are two organisations that complement each other in terms of purpose and subject; one for humanitarian and one for political. That’s why secretary general of the CoE also attends EPC. In this context, it’d be inaccurate to say that they have nothing to do with each other.

On the recognition of North Cyprus, I believe this is not the right place to discuss such a longstanding issue. But I can say that acceptance of Greek Cyprus, which always opposed solution efforts including the Annan Plan referendums, into the EU and the EU’s pro-Greek Cyprus stance are all because of Greece’s threats to the EU by blocking further EU enlargement and some other common policies. It’s well known by relevant people in Europe as well, and thankfully some Europeans can approach the issue with common sense. 46.155.73.88 (talk) 07:18, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Just because the CoE attends meetings of the EPC, it does not mean that the CoE is related to the EPC. NATO and the OSCE also attend some meetings, and they also have nothing to do structurally with the EPC. In fact, the CoE has been critical and skeptical at times of the EPC. A CoE spokesperson commented on the redundancy of the EPC stating, "In the field of human rights, democracy and the rule of law, such a pan-European community already exists: it is the Council of Europe."[2] Its quite normal for organizations to attend meetings of other organizations as observers or guests. Many organizations often attend meetings of the Arab League or the Organization of American States, but it does not mean that they have any connection to them. Please try and understand this. Archives908 (talk) 14:18, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

I think you miss the point. Saying “EPC has nothing to do with the CoE” is different; giving examples of bilateral/multilateral relations on organisational level is different. In today’s world, otherwise is unthinkable. Their leadership can be skeptical of each other or they can have no relations at the beginning, but it’s almost unavoidable to have impacts on each other as you can see the example of the EU and the CoE. At this point, the CoE is a good reference as are other institutions.

Anyway let’s get back to our topic; is this the only “reason” you see to not include North Cyprus onto the page? It’s sad that there’s an ongoing conflict between historically close nations, but it’s a fact that North Cyprus is a different example than other “states with limited recognition”. 46.155.73.88 (talk) 18:23, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

No, I think you have missed all the points. Also, your arguments for inclusion are incoherent. Per WP:RELEVANCE and WP:RSUW policies, their inclusion has no useful purpose to the topic of the EPC. They were never invited (or even considered to be invited), therefore, it serves no useful purpose to the reader or the subject matter. Archives908 (talk) 19:06, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

For the record, your proposed edit has been reverted several times by numerous editors (on 15 November 2022, 31 May 2023, 2 May 2024, and 25 November 2024). The clear WP:CON established, is that, states not invited to participate, should not be included. Archives908 (talk) 19:15, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

The concept of “considered states” doesn’t make sense.

North Cyprus is involved with several regional institutions/organisations in some way despite the embargo. Therefore it’s worth to mention.

I don’t know about other edits you mention but it’s very clear that we couldn’t reach to a consensus with you. Your arguments and responses are way far from being constructive. And if I’m not the first one to propose that edit, then it means there are several other people who thinks like me. Other Wikipedians -neutral and objective users- must comment on that. 46.155.73.88 (talk) 20:30, 26 November 2024 (UTC)