Manufacturing Discontent: the Rise to Power of Anti-TTIP Groups
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
ECIPE OCCASIONAL PAPER • 02/2016 Manufacturing Discontent: The Rise to Power of Anti-TTIP Groups By Matthias Bauer, Senior Economist* *Special thanks to Karen Rudolph (Otto-Friedrich-University Bamberg) and Agnieszka Smiatacz (Research Assistant at ECIPE) for research support all along the process of the preparation of this study. ecipe occasional paper — no. 02/2016 ABSTRACT Old beliefs, new symbols, new faces. In 2013, a small group of German green and left- wing activists, professional campaign NGOs and well-established protectionist organisations set up deceptive communication campaigns against TTIP, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership between the European Union and the United States. Germany’s anti-TTIP NGOs explicitly aimed to take German-centred protests to other European countries. Teir reasoning is contradictory and logically inconsistent. Teir messages are targeted to serve common sense protectionist demands of generally ill-informed citizens and politicians. Tereby, anti-TTIP communication is based on metaphoric messages and far-fetched myths to efectively evoke citizens’ emotions. Together, these groups dominated over 90 percent of online media reporting on TTIP in Germany. Anti-TTIP protest groups in Germany are not only inventive; they are also resourceful. Based on generous public funding and opaque private donations, green and left-wing political parties, political foundations, clerical and environmental groups, and well-established anti-globalisation organisations maintain infuential campaign networks. Protest groups’ activities are coordinated by a number of former and current green and left-wing politicians and political parties that search for anti-establishment political profles. As Wallon blockage mentality regarding CETA, the trade and investment agreement between the European Union and Canada, demonstrates, Germany’s anti-TTIP groups’ attempts to undermine EU trade policy bear the risk of coming to fruition in other Eurpean countries. And they carry the real possibility of depriving EU Member States from new economic opportunities and economic convergence. For Germany, we analyse a unique and comprehensive dataset of 1,508 publicly held “TTIP information” events to study the “local” (ofine) politics of TTIP. We fnd that hostile anti-TTIP sentiment in Germany has not at all developed bottom-up. Leading protest campaign organisa- tions literally manufactured discontent about TTIP. Widespread aversion to TTIP in Germany is the result of an orchestrated, top-down campaign initiative launched by a small number of long-established, well-connected and, thus, highly infuential politicians of Germany’s Green and left-wing political parties and associated NGO campaign managers masquerading and oper- ating under the guise of pro-democracy, pro-environment and pro-Christian civil society. Nimble institutional structures, common ideological mind-sets and a strong afnity to modern online media allowed Germany’s anti-TTIP NGOs to turbo-charge online and on-the-ground protest activities in other European countries. At EU level, the European Commission itself pro- vided enourmous fnancial funding to a great number of declared anti-TTIP campaign NGOs – in full knowledge about these organisations’ ideologically driven, all too often deceptive, and therefore destructive, ways of political campaigning. 2 ecipe occasional paper — no. 02/2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract 2 List of Figures 4 Executive Summary 6 1. Introduction 13 2. Germans’ Aversion to TTIP – Why the TTIP Agreement is so Diferent 14 3. What Do Germans Tink About TTIP? 16 4. Anti-TTIP NGOs Exploiting Slacktivism: Messages and Information Spread about TTIP in Germany (and Austria) 23 5. Dataset and Methodological Considerations 27 5.1. Te Dataset 27 5.2. Coding of Event Data 28 6. (Anti-) TTIP Campaign Work in Germany 30 6.1. Hosts and Organisers of TTIP Events in Germany 30 6.2. Tematic Issues Addressed by TTIP Events in Germany 37 6.3. Regional Distribution of TTIP Events in Germany 39 6.4. TTIP Experts and Speakers in Germany 40 6.5. Horse(s) and Rider(s) in Anti-TTIP Campaign Work in Germany 47 6.5.1. Top 50 Speakers on TTIP and Institutional Afliations 48 6.5.2. Top Infuencers and Institutional Networks within Germany’s Anti-TTIP Political Campaign Scene 54 6.5.3. Anti-TTIP Infuencer Index 64 6.6. A Glance at Austria 67 7. Te Dominant Role of German Organisations in Europe’s Anti-TTIP Campaign Scene 70 8. Te European Commission’s Role in Financing Anti-TTIP Protest NGOs 77 9. Te Role of Russia in Shaping Public Opinion about TTIP 83 10. Teses and Concluding Remarks 87 References 90 3 ecipe occasional paper — no. 02/2016 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: What Germans Associate with Market and Government-Planned Economies 15 Figure 2: Development of Search Interest for TTIP, May 2013 to June 2016 16 Figure 3: Google Search Interest by Country 17 Figure 4: Most Popular Google Search Queries Related to TTIP 18 Figure 5: European Citizens’ Feelings About TTIP Versus Germany and Austria 19 Figure 6: European Citizens’ Feelings About a “Transatlantic FTA” and a “TTIP” Between the EU and the US 19 Figure 7: Popularity Discount on “TTIP” Versus “Transatlantic FTA” in European Countries 20 Figure 8: European Citizens’ Sentiment Towards TTIP 20 Figure 9: TTIP Support and Youth Unemployment in the EU 21 Figure 10: TTIP Support and State of Intra-EU Economic Development 22 Figure 11: Number of Visits of EU Commission’s Ofcial TTIP Negotiation Texts’ Webpage Versus Number of Signatures Collected by “Stop TTIP” Campaign Organisations 27 Figure 12: Distribution of Major Groups of Stakeholders Organising on TTIP 32 Figure 13: Top 20 Business Associations Organising TTIP Events in Germany, by Number of Hosted Events 33 Figure 14: Number of Individual Businesses Organising TTIP Events in Germany, by Number of Hosted Events 33 Figure 15: Top 30 “Declared” Anti-TTIP Campaign Network Member Organisations, by Number of Hosted Events 35 Figure 16: Political Parties, by Number of Hosted Events 36 Figure 17: Political Parties’ Event Activity Adjusted by Voters’ Support, Index Value 37 Figure 18: Major Subjects Addressed by TTIP Events in Germany 38 Figure 19: Sentiment Conveyed by Event Header 38 Figure 20: Development of Most Frequent Controversial Subjects Over Time, Absolute Numbers 39 Figure 21: Development of Most Frequent Controversial Subjects Over Time, Relative Proportion 39 Figure 22: Number of TTIP Events Broken Down by German Federal State 40 Figure 23: Distribution of Major Groups of Stakeholders’ Speakers at TTIP Events in Germany 41 Figure 24: Number of Speakers Afliated with Business Associations (Top 20) 42 Figure 25: Number Speakers Afliated with Individual Businesses 42 Figure 26: Number of Speakers at TTIP Events in Germany, by “Declared” Anti-TTIP Campaign Member Organisation (Top 30) 43 Figure 27: Number of Speakers from Political Parties 45 Figure 28: Political Parties’ Speaker Activity Adjusted By Voters’ Support, Index Value 46 Figure 29: Political Foundations in the TTIP Debate in Germany 46 Figure 30: Top 50 TTIP Experts in Germany and Institutional Afliations 62 Figure 31: Anti-TTIP Campaign Groups’ Speakers (Among Top 50 Speakers on TTIP in Germany) and Institutional Afliations 63 Figure 32: Anti-TTIP Infuencer Index 65 Figure 33: Distribution of Major Groups of Stakeholders Organising on TTIP in Austria 67 Figure 34: Distribution of Major Groups of Stakeholders Organising on TTIP, Germany Versus Austria 68 Figure 35: Austria’s Top “declared” Anti-TTIP Campaign Network Member Organisations, by Number of Hosted Events 68 Figure 36: Top TTP-Related Subjects Addressed by TTIP Events in Austria 69 4 ecipe occasional paper — no. 02/2016 Figure 37: Country of Origin of Declared Anti-TTIP Member Organisations of the “Self-Organised European Citizens Initiative (ECI)” Against TTIP 72 Figure 38: Relative Number of Citizens Signing Up for an European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI) Against TTIP 72 Figure 39: Number and Country of Origin of Anti-TTIP ECI Members Versus Quorum Achieved at National Level 73 Figure 40: German Dominance Over Anti-TTIP Tweets on Twitter, @eci_ttip (Stop TTIP) 74 Figure 41: Anti-TTIP and Anti-TPP Organisations Funded by Germany’s Campact Including Campaign Funding and Funding for the Establishment of Infrastructure for Political Education 75 Figure 42: Top 3 TTIP-Related Topical Issues by Country 76 Figure 43: (EU) Funding and Spending on Trade and Investment Projects, Transnational Institute 79 Figure 44: Sentiment of TTIP-Related Online Media Reporting, Russia Today Versus Total Media Reporting 84 Figure 45: Sentiment of Country-Specifc TTIP-Related Online Media Reporting, Russia Today Versus Total Media Reporting 86 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Narratives and Phrases Spread on TTIP by Germany’s Most Active Anti-TIPP Organisations 24 Table 2: Validity Check of Claims Spread by Germany’s Anti-TTIP Groups 25 Table 3: Declared Anti-TTIP Groups’ Sponsored TTIP Advertisements on Google Search Engine 26 Table 4: Top 50 TTIP Event Speakers and Institutional Afliation 49 Table 5: TTIP-Related Comments and Statements of Bernd Lange 56 Table 6: TTIP-Related Comments and Statements of Sven Giegold 57 5 ecipe occasional paper — no. 02/2016 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On Germany’s Anti-TTIP Scene 1. Ideology-driven clicktivism, paid anti-TTIP advertisments on online search en- gines, a hijacked public consultation on investment protection, a de facto loss of the EU’s legal competences in trade policy, and Wallonia blocking the EU’s most advanced free trade agreement CETA – originating in Germany, ferce, forceful and deceptive anti-TTIP campaign- ing by super-connected anti-TTIP campaign NGOs not only managed to turn the public debate about TTIP toxic; it also brought about the deepest crisis in the history of EU trade policy. 2. Opinion polls indicate that the majority of EU citizens are in favour of TTIP. At the same time, Germans (and Austrians) drop out of their presumed roles of being reasonable supporters of well-regulated free trade and open markets.