It is perhaps the EU's biggest challenge. How do you explain the 25-nation bloc's complex workings in a way which makes sense to ordinary people?
With public support for the EU sagging across Europe, leaders have been promising for years to shear the bloc's texts and communiques of confusing Euro-babble.
But they haven't been very successful. The EU's own Web site even includes a section unblushingly titled "A plain language guide to Eurojargon."
It explains to mere mortals the meaning of terms like "acquis communautaire," "subsidiarity" and "rendez-vous clause" which baffle even seasoned eurocrats and hard-bitten reporters.
Insiders are also critical of the heavy verbiage.
Slovenian Foreign Minister Dimitrij Rupel, in an interview, scolded the EU for using ponderous and obtuse language to sugar-coat unpalatable compromises.
Calling for states in Western Balkans to be given a chance to join the EU, the straight-talking Rupel warned the bloc not to play games by offering the troubled region second class membership.
"Imagine a Serbian politician goes to a village ... on the Bulgarian border somewhere ... and says `look, if we behave, we shall get an association and stabilization treaty,'" said Rupel rolling his eyes over the EU's sub-membership treaty policy.
"They don't know what that is. They don't have the faintest idea," he said.
Sheer incomprehension is often the public response to EU documents, which must be agreed by all 25 member states and often end up with convoluted formulations taking into account 25 national sensitivities.
A ponderous and uninspiring 125-page EU constitution, torpedoed last year by voters in France and the Netherlands, was a poster-child for language which fails to inspire the broad public.
The failed treaty's preamble says it draws "inspiration from the cultural, religious and humanist inheritance of Europe, the values of which, still present in its heritage, have embedded within the life of society its perception of the central role of the human person..."
EU texts also have a grab-bag nature with each member state seeking to insert pet projects or ideologies. The intentions may be good, but this means a summit communique often contains clauses which appear contradictory. And most EU declarations are far too long.
The classic case of doing the EU splits pits pro-market economy Anglo-Saxon and northern European member states against countries like France which favors a bigger government role in the economy and is often accused of being protectionist.
A communique for the present EU summit is a textbook example of this and it's obvious at first read which sections were French inspired and which were inserted at the behest of London.
Admitting the bloc's 2000 "Lisbon Strategy" -- a master plan aimed at making the EU the most competitive world economy by 2010 -- needs an overhaul given its failure to achieve results, the text makes a series of curious non-binding suggestions.
"European values can underpin modernization in our economies and societies in a globalized world," declares the summit communique.
What exactly European values are or how they will help the economy to take off is not revealed by EU leaders. No concrete policies or figures are provided for the curious citizen.
Instead, this is followed by what appear to be British inspired clauses calling for "creating a more favorable business environment" and then an apparent French demand that moves for growth must promote "social cohesion in compliance with European values."
A further caveat in the communique is that EU economic growth must be "environmentally sustainable."
Seeking to combine growth with greenery, the text makes a series of again non-binding "lines for action" including "exploration of specific actions to bring about more sustainable consumption and production patterns at the EU and global levels."
The catch-all end of the communique includes a series of issues allegedly discussed by leaders including a "European Pact for Gender Equality," a call to give "all children equal opportunities, regardless of their social background" and support for a "European Pact for Youth."
Finally, there's the declaration of commitment to "flexicurity."
Got it?
The return of US president-elect Donald Trump to the White House has injected a new wave of anxiety across the Taiwan Strait. For Taiwan, an island whose very survival depends on the delicate and strategic support from the US, Trump’s election victory raises a cascade of questions and fears about what lies ahead. His approach to international relations — grounded in transactional and unpredictable policies — poses unique risks to Taiwan’s stability, economic prosperity and geopolitical standing. Trump’s first term left a complicated legacy in the region. On the one hand, his administration ramped up arms sales to Taiwan and sanctioned
The Taiwanese have proven to be resilient in the face of disasters and they have resisted continuing attempts to subordinate Taiwan to the People’s Republic of China (PRC). Nonetheless, the Taiwanese can and should do more to become even more resilient and to be better prepared for resistance should the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) try to annex Taiwan. President William Lai (賴清德) argues that the Taiwanese should determine their own fate. This position continues the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) tradition of opposing the CCP’s annexation of Taiwan. Lai challenges the CCP’s narrative by stating that Taiwan is not subordinate to the
US president-elect Donald Trump is to return to the White House in January, but his second term would surely be different from the first. His Cabinet would not include former US secretary of state Mike Pompeo and former US national security adviser John Bolton, both outspoken supporters of Taiwan. Trump is expected to implement a transactionalist approach to Taiwan, including measures such as demanding that Taiwan pay a high “protection fee” or requiring that Taiwan’s military spending amount to at least 10 percent of its GDP. However, if the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) invades Taiwan, it is doubtful that Trump would dispatch
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) has been dubbed Taiwan’s “sacred mountain.” In the past few years, it has invested in the construction of fabs in the US, Japan and Europe, and has long been a world-leading super enterprise — a source of pride for Taiwanese. However, many erroneous news reports, some part of cognitive warfare campaigns, have appeared online, intentionally spreading the false idea that TSMC is not really a Taiwanese company. It is true that TSMC depositary receipts can be purchased on the US securities market, and the proportion of foreign investment in the company is high. However, this reflects the