Like every year, The AEGEEan is giving a platform to candidates for a position in the European Level boards and commissions of our association to answer to some questions in order to present themselves. This year, we established a cooperation with the Golden Times and, together with his Editor Gunnar Erth, former and current journalists of our magazine will interview the candidates for the upcoming Agora in Krakow. Today we present you with the only candidate (so far) for the position of  Equal Rights Working Group Coordinator Julia Roshan Moniri (AEGEE- Frankfurt am Main) and  three members, all running for one of the six positions available for the members of the Network Commission: Brian Brands (AEGEE-Tilburg), Novak Simin (AEGEE-Novi Sad), Refik Barış Özçelik (AEGEE-Izmir).

One of the Focus Areas of AEGEE is Equal Rights, with the aim to acknowledge and tackle discrimination based on gender identity, expression and sexual orientation, and to promote equality from an intersectional perspective. Contributing to that is the Equal Rights Working Group, which supports the Network in organising activities and sets up its own related activities too. Julia Roshan Moniri, member of AEGEE-Frankfurt am Main, is motivated to take on the leadership of this Working Group for the next term, starting on the 1st of August. About time that we get to know her!

Check her interview here.

Find Julia’s complete candidature here.

Refik Barış Özçelik took his first steps on the European level of AEGEE as Content Manager of the Events Quality Assurence Committee (EQAC). The 19-year old member of AEGEE-Izmir will present his candidature as Network Commissioner at Agora Kraków.

Check his interview here.

Find Refik Barış’ complete candidature here.

Getting inspired by AEGEE’s greatest events ever as well as creating new ones: this is one of many things that Novak Simin from AEGEE-Novi Sad wants to do if he gets elected Network Commissioner at Agora Kraków. “I would also like to see more locals cooperate on a joined project or joined event”, he says. The 22-year old engineering student currently serves as Subcommissioner of Marina Klanjčić and is also member of the Action Agenda Coordination Committee (ACT).

Check his interview here.

You can read Novak’s full candidature here.

Brian Brands, student of Supply Chain Management in Tilburg, discovered AEGEE two years ago. After more than a year in the board of AEGEE-Tilburg, the 26-year old is ready to take a step further and to contribute to the development of locals from the Netcom perspective.

Check his interview here.

You can read Brian’s complete candidature here.

Like every year, The AEGEEan is giving a platform to candidates for a position in the European Level boards and commissions of our association to answer to some questions in order to present themselves. This year, we established a cooperation with the Golden Times and, together with his Editor Gunnar Erth, former and current journalists of our magazine will interview the candidates for the upcoming Agora in Krakow. Today we present you with the candidature of the three candidates for Juridical Commission Veronika Chmelárová (AEGEE-Berlin), Lisette Kunst (AEGEE-Groningen), Giuseppe Aquilino (AEGEE-Catania), and the candidate for Secretary General of AEGEE-Europe Monika Mojak (AEGEE-Warszawa). 

Veronika Chmelárová is very young, but she has already experienced a lot of thing in the association, such as Local Board and Home-based CD assistant. Among her tasks, she is also a member of the Juridical Commission (JC) for the term 2017-2018. After successfully running in Enschede, the 20-year old AEGEE-Berlin member is ready to run for a second term during Spring Agora Krakow.

Check her interview here.

You can read her full candidature here.

Lisette Kunst is a 24-year old law student from AEGEE-Groningen. She has been a member of the Mediation Commission for the term between Agora Kyïv and Agora Chisinau, and, after a term as subcommissioner of the JC, she is ready to be part of it. We asked her some questions to get to know her and her candidature better right before the Agora.

Check her interview here.

You can read her full candidature here.

In Spring Agora Enschede, he was torn between applying for Juridical Commission and Comité Directeur. Even if he chose to run for CD, Giuseppe Aquilino still had the dream to join the Juridical Commission (JC). In Agora Kraków he will try to make his dream come true, running for a place in the commission.

Check out his interview here.

You can read his full candidature here.

At Spring Agora Kraków, so far there will be only one candidate for the position of Secretary General of AEGEE-Europe for the term 2018/19: Monika Mojak. “I have all needed qualities to serve as mediator of the team, be the ‘mother of the headoffice’ and the ‘good spirit of the house’, says the AEGEE-Warszawa member, who is currently President of the Juridical Commission.

Check her interview here.

You can read her full candidature here.

The upcoming Agora is a place where a new generation of NetCommies is going to be elected. The Network Commission has always been one of the most crucial Commission we had in our Network, but now maybe even more than ever. Celia believes she is motivated enough and ready to take the job. She would like to lead by example her assigned locals, pushing them to fulfill the Antenna Criteria and getting stronger.

The AEGEEan: Who are you? For what do we know you?

Celia: To define myself there are some aspects that I consider essential.
First of all, talking about me inside AEGEE I have been a member of AEGEE-Zaragoza since 2013 and I am active from the beginning. Currently, I am president of this antenna and also subcommissioner of the Network Commission. Additionally, I collaborate with the Gender Equality Interest Group.
Secondly, I consider myself as a hurricane of energy, I love doing always new things and getting engaged with new projects. I am a tidy and responsible girl, but at the same time, I have a lot of creativity and a pinch of craziness, I love enjoying every moment of my life.
Last but not least, as many members of AEGEE, I love travelling and meeting new people and new cultures around the world.

Describe your ideal leader. Is a Netcommie a leader? Why? How can you be that leader you described?

In my opinion, a leader has to be an example to follow, a role model, a person who knows how to develop strategies to achieve common a goal making everyone feel involved and working on the things they are best on. I think a leader is also a person willing to receive feedback and continuously making the team grow.
A Netcommie then has many similarities with this definition: I believe it’s important to be willing to listen to its team and to the different locals. It’s crucial to have great teamwork to bear in mind all the opinions and feelings of the team members trying to get everyone on board, feeling comfortable and heard in every moment.
In my case, I consider myself a person open to feedback and to work within a team. Along these years in AEGEE I have worked in a team in several occasions as leader (being president or main organiser of events for instance) feeling comfortable and trying to get better little by little.

What are the NetCom projects you are more interested to contribute to? Why?

If I have to choose one, I would choose the Mentorship system. I think it’s always very interesting to be able to learn from other locals and to put people in touch so that they can share their experiences and anecdotes. In this way they can develop stronger bonds among locals and learn from each other. Related to this, I would want to work on a Toolkit for contacts to make it more accessible for people interested in founding an antenna to achieve what they want in every moment.

What do you think about the Antenna Criteria Reform introduced at Agora Enschede? Would you like to change something?

In my opinion the Antenna Criteria Reform has been a great method to make the Antenna Criteria more adequate to the reality of the locals. I think this is the kind of revisions that should be carried out constantly getting adapted to the needs of the locals so they don’t become a barrier for the locals to grow but a method to make them stronger. Antenna Criteria currently don’t reflect the needs of the locals and therefore I would not want just to check if all the locals have everything done but also to get to know the reasons behind an antenna not accomplishing them. This would allow me to help them grow and get stronger.

In the Network Status Update email that the Network received some days ago, there were many locals in danger, would you like to comment this? How will you work to change this situation?

It’s truly sad to see that many antennae are in risk to be downgraded but I am aware of the huge work that some people are doing in order to avoid that. I trust in the work of the Network Commission to improve the situation every time and help locals to get developed. With the collaboration of the subcommies, I would like to have a permanent contact with the locals and get more approachable to them to understand fully their needs. This would help us not just to make sure the Antenna Criteria are followed but also to motivate the local to work in the right direction. Many times, antennae don’t fully understand antenna criteria work or which are the AC they have to fulfill. There could be a project to be implemented all along the network to explain properly what AC are, which one each antenna should fulfill and more importantly, how to fulfill them. There could be a very visual manual containing links to forms, KT documents explaining things in details, etc.

In your programme you say that you would like to bring the AEGEE Bodies closer to the members, but the strategy you proposed seems the other way around: to bring the members closer to the AEGEE Bodies. Can you tell us something you would do in order to bring the AEGEE bodies closer to the members?

Actually I think both are important. On the one hand, it’s crucial to allow members to know the European Bodies, what do they work on, how they can get in touch with each other, to show they are friendly and they are willing to help. On the other hand, it’s also very important to work with different European Bodies to be able to help the locals in any issue they may find. As Network Commissioner, I would want to count on the support of the European Bodies and to be able to work with them. To put them in touch I would want them to collaborate not just at NWM but also at LTCs or RTCs for instance.

To ensure continuity and stability, among the other things, you wrote that you would like to continue the projects made by “La Nave” locals called “Connecting Locals” and “Local of the Month”. What would you do to ensure continuity if “La Nave” locals won’t be assigned to you?

All the projects carried out in La Nave locals could be easily transferable to any other local. Having the experience of being Alejandra’s subcommie, I would be able to take those and apply them into the reality of the specific locals or even to the whole Network.
It would also motivate other Netcommies to continue and implement these projects.

Describe the features of “the perfect NetCommie”.

First of all, I would want to emphasise that it would have to be a friendly person, open to new ideas, to receive feedback, to include changes and to improve for the Network. Additionally, I think this perfect NetCommie would have to be a hard worker and proactive person open to try new things, learn from mistakes and not fearing to make new mistakes by changing for the better

How would you like to support the CD in your daily work?

I think it’s important to work in close relation with the CD as they are also aware of the Network status and they are a great source of ideas and information which is very convenient for the work of the Netcom team.
I also like the Netcom-CD pair system that is already in play and I would want to keep it as I think it’s a great way of working together having two European bodies in touch. Furthermore, I want to work closely with the CD to organise the NWMs together with the team of subcommies and the hosting local in order to have a fruitful and nice cooperation. I think it’s also very important to bring closer the work of the CD to the locals and make more visible what they do and how friendly they are to help in any issue the members may have.

Why would we need to vote for you?

One of the most important things I think it’s needed for any position you run for is the motivation and, that, I have way more than enough!
I’m willing to start to work in this new adventure and face the new challenges it brings me. Every time I take any responsibility, I fight until the last moment and I do whatever is in my hand to achieve my objectives. I can’t imagine giving up or not doing my best every day. I would like to bring this motivation to the rest of the team to be able to have a nice working atmosphere and to coordinate plenty of project helping the locals every time. I love helping and being in touch with people, understanding the different cases and trying to empathise, giving always my help and my hand for anything that´s needed. I’m a real doer and I love getting really involved to solve all different sort of challenges!

You can read her full candidature here.

Written by Lisa Gregis, AEGEE-Bergamo

After the first part of Proposals explanation, which was mainly focused on the locals, now we are turning the lights on Agora’s deadlines and timeframes. 

Agora Timeframe

Following the Motion on Informing the Network of the Agora dates, Lia Tuska on behalf of the Comité Directeur would like to change the timeframe in which the dates of an Agora have to be announced. Right now the local organisers should communicate to the Network the dates of the event at least two months before. This proposal would like to change it to eight months in order to give all the necessary time to the Network and the stakeholders of the Agora to plan ahead and have a balanced calendar of the event in the Network. In fact the proposer is also suggesting to set the time range an Autumn Agora can take place, meaning between the 1st of October and two weeks before the 1st of December.

You can read the full proposal here.

Proposal To Set All Deadlines For Publishing Official Documents at Two Weeks Before the Agora

Proposed by Evelien Kroon, Jochem Postmes and Steyn ten Kate on behalf of AEGEE-Enschede. When we talk about Agora, one of the things we might think about is meeting the deadlines. Booklets of the Agora need to be sent to the Network at least two weeks before the Agora, but not the activity report from the Comité Directeur and the annual and internal financial report from the Financial Director, which can be sent one week before. This proposal aims at setting the deadlines also for these documents at two weeks before the starting of the Agora, in order to allow the Delegates to be more prepared and better informed about what they will face at the upcoming Agora.

You can read the full proposal here.

Introducing a Preparatory Deadline for Proposals

This proposal was created in the context of the Agora Reform Task Force, but it is proposed by Maarten de Groot on behalf of the Comité Directeur, Monika Mojak, Elisa Tabbi and Joris Veenhuis on behalf of the Juridical Commission, since the Agora Task Force is not an official body of AEGEE-Europe. At the moment, if you want to put forward a proposal for the upcoming Agora, you need to send an email to the Juridical Commission, which will then upload it to the Online Voting System and they will never change until the Agora will discuss it during the Prytanium. The proposers would like to split this process in two parts, allowing the Network to discuss and still being able to edit a proposal while it is published online. The process would be the following:

• Send a draft of the proposal including at least the idea and motivation, at least 45 days before the Agora.
• After that, leave time to collect feeback from the Network.
• Submit the final proposal (which can be a different version from the first draft thanks to the feedback collected) at least one month prior the beginning of the Agora.
• In case you want to change your proposal within a month before the Agora, you can only do that in consulation with the Juridical Commission
• When you will discuss the Proposal during the Prytanium you will be requested to give a recap of the online discussion

You can read the full proposal here.

On the Candidature Application Period

As the proposal above, this one as well has been developed in the context of the Agora Reform Task Force, but is proposed by Maarten De Groot on behalf of the Comité Directeur. Since we have been facing a trend of lack of candidates during the last Agorae, the proposer would like to give the Network a wider choice. That is why this proposal would like not to close the deadline for candidates for a position until there are enough candidates for the vacant places plus one. In case there aren’t enough candidates the Chair Team will close the deadline only at the Agora.

You can read the full proposal here.

Written by Lisa Gregis, AEGEE-Bergamo & AEGEE-Verona

Former Projects Director and current President of AEGEE-Europe Réka Salamon, from AEGEE-Aachen and AEGEE-Debrecen, is an active AEGEEan since 2011. She has covered many different areas of the association and now she is running for a second term as President of AEGEE-Europe. We reached out to her for this interview and also asked her the questions we received from the Network.

The AEGEEan: You mention bringing back more thematic conferences. How do you plan to do that?

Working in AEGEE-Europe for such a long time, I have identified some key structures:

Scenario 1: We provide more space to connect with each other at key events. Imagine thematic projects being born during the Agora and NWMs. When locals come together, share experience and knowledge and want to realise things together, realising they are already working on similar projects and the European dimension can only add to it. The thematic conferences are managed by a small core team from all the locals and the hosting locals don’t need to be found by open call – they came up with the idea on the first place. For example: is your local organising activities related to education about the EU? You can find ten more at least in the Network!

Scenario 2: We as a Network identify something topical that is crucial in the development of the future of Europe and select it as a topic of… not only the EPM, but a topic that a series of conferences should explore. A yearly plan/Flagship topic for the Network. With more conferences taking place in different parts of the Network (under the same or similar theme) we can truly explore not only what AEGEE’s opinion is, but also the conferences should be open to the local community/city students so the locals can recruit new members with conferences. Example: why don’t we organise a series of thematic conferences on the Sustainable Development Goals of the UN? Focus and funding are all over the place!

Your programme is based on analysis of the current situation, that you were able to conduct thanks to your extensive experience and your consolidated presence in the AEGEE House. Have you already shared your perspective with other actors and have you found common ground to work on? How do you think you can convey your vision to the Network?

Réka: The document has been continuously shaped based on a lot of data and discussions, new perspectives and new input that reached me. And it should still evolve with more discussions and reflections. I do not think I have the ultimate truth, nor the perfect solution to our problems. The document aims to provide information based on a lot of research, and it also aims to provoke in order to gain more attention from more actors, as well as being an invitation to a conversation where we can rethink and rebuild together. To convey the message: my vision is a stronger AEGEE that can be a real change-maker in the future of the European continent – the document is only a tool to provoke discussion, and to agree on working together with the Network on the solution.

You stress that going back to a simplification of AEGEE would increase flexibility, which is often mentioned as a failure of an overly bureaucratic system. How do you envision that?

1) Give a direction to the thematic work (keep the focus areas and their aims, but without a pre-drafted Action Agenda homework), 2) rebuild a Strategic Plan that is a smart Growth Plan for the organisational improvements (with external consultation and careful assessment of our resources), and 3) the organisational bodies’ work to be clearly connected to this Growth Plan (be able to provide trainings and meetings for Committee and Commission members).

AEGEE’s structure should be simplified according to a needs-based approach: what are the needs of the Network? What are the needs of the AEGEE-Europe head office? We find where the needs overlap and we create/keep those bodies on higher priority. Simplification and clarity will bring us more members. In this world of information overload, we need to keep our message clear and what we offer to the youth of Europe, easy to understand.

“Fixing the system” and “being a cold-headed robot” sounds a bit detached when talking about a Network of people driven by passion and belief, as you point out in other parts of your candidature. Why this choice of words?

People often see me being cold at first, so I learned how to play with it. I am fun when I feel the atmosphere allows me to relax, and I have the crazy passion that is ready to move mountains, limitless in possibilities. But I am also a smart manager of too many things in a too-complex organisation. The level of engagement in different matters is really different between AEGEE volunteers as well as their expectations of the very few members of the CD.

I see myself as an implementor, and I am continuously learning, studying management to increase my efficiency in managing the workload, filtering information and bringing the best possible opportunities to the organisation. My role in the complex AEGEE world is to strengthen the structure and give more tools to the members so they can live their passions. If you think about it, in a Network of a lot of passionate people, it is also good to have someone who keeps a cold head in the management. [she smiles, ed.]

Your AEGEE State of Play document is very detailed, but also very long and technical. How would you summarise the key points in it for first-time delegates?

The AEGEE State of Play wants to invite the Network for a conversation – because a lot of problems surfacing here and there are connected to or are consequences of each other. It tries to explain complex processes but essentially it wants to point to three learning lessons:
a. Question the status quo – let’s simplify the way we do things so we can breathe again and AEGEE’s crazy passion can run free!
b. The relationship between AEGEE-Europe and the AEGEE Network needs marriage counselling – we need to strengthen the work of AEGEE-Europe bodies to provide better support, but we need to do it with more trainings and more meetings!
c. AEGEE is a playground for the members as it is the change-maker for Europe – let’s use our biggest events to the full and have spaces for the best ideas to come together and build a better Europe together!

Agora is a space for the democratic process of the association. There is already enough discussion on how much time do we have, how long Agora is, how little flexibility we can allow with the programme. How do you think we could manage to fit a thematic part as well? And how would you see EPM, if Agora also becomes thematic?

A lot of discussions around the Agora are quick-fixes in my eyes. Like tackling surface issues when we should just be taking a clean piece of paper and identifying what kind of event we need and what kind of event we want. Agora is not just any event, it is the beating heart of AEGEE, and we literally have to feel its importance in order to clear our schedule, check our finances and want to go to Agora, not only because it is antenna criteria, but because it is mini AEGEE!

Scenario 1: The concept of the Agora has to be clear: it is a general assembly, it is a huge youth gathering, it is a primary meeting point for the AEGEE Network. At the moment it is 80% general assembly, 5% youth gathering (with conference?), 15% meeting for the AEGEE Network (social programme). What if we could reduce the general assembly sessions by having targeted consultations about the proposals during NWMs already? What if we had continuous communication about the activities of European Bodies during the year and only the most critical questions would be discussed at the Agora? What if we had fewer elected positions (that we are usually lacking candidates for) and the people taking leading positions could prove themselves by good work and not gain trust by a funny stage presentation? These modifications are all possible.

Scenario 2: This is a bit more complicated, bear with me. Agora, being the biggest youth gathering among other organisations, is one of the biggest fundraising opportunities, not for corporate but for institutional fundraising and the development of a network area. Imagine a huge thematic project for an area having its opening conference at the Agora, involving the local community and continuing with events taking place in the surrounding locals as well in the upcoming year. The European Commission would love conferences with 700 people where we kick off large-scale Erasmus+ funded projects for the development of our locals, and raise awareness about EU policies at the same time. It’s a win-win!

Do you believe AEGEE reaches out to “all those who are unheard, all those who are disappointed” in the broadest possible sense right now, or has the potential to do so?

AEGEE being inclusive/non-inclusive is a never-ending discussion. I believe in a lot of cases we want to be inclusive but we might not be able to afford the tools to do so. I want AEGEE to be the organisation truly for everyone in Europe, interdisciplinary, students and youth, we can be the destination for everyone from the politically frustrated to the one with disabilities. This approach needs to come with two important things, however: an agreement to live up to our values of being inclusive in our daily practices, and what we are lacking: the management of resources to be able to have bigger outreach. AEGEE’s impact needs to manifest in rising numbers of membership, greater recognition gained, the unheard and disappointed seeing AEGEE as their place to better themselves, and Europe. In a Europe that is burning in all corners, AEGEE should be the ultimate destination for people who want to build a future for Europe!

Questions from the Network

You are running for CD for the 4th time. Do you think it is fair to the current generations of AEGEE members, as if you win, you take away their chance to develop AEGEE and will make them a lost generation?

I did not get elected the first time. I do understand the concerns though. Still, I strongly believe that difficult circumstances require extraordinary efforts. CD is a very demanding experience, but is also the entity that shapes the Network substantially. With the lack of candidates for CD in recent years, and some of our members jumping into the CD too fast, we have to ask ourselves, isn’t it experience and knowledge that is needed in order to develop the organisation?

In addition, I think AEGEE members have plenty of opportunities to learn in the organisation without aiming straight for the “highest position” and becoming members of the CD. There have been many cases where even experienced members crashed under the workload and left demotivated and broken. AEGEE’s membership cycle shortened, but the opportunities to learn have stayed around – launch a project, become liaison officer, run for the Network Commission to help the locals etc. There are many opportunities.

I am aware that my intentions are unprecedented. But I strongly believe that in the current state of the organisation, we need continuity and stability. In a changing Europe, with many new challenges emerging, many of our mechanisms being outdated, and the competition with other organisations being harder to manage. I don’t want to stay for much longer; but I want to use the peak of my knowledge to facilitate the process of rebuilding AEGEE’s internal system, to be the real change-makers in Europe that we have always meant to be.

After two years in the CD, do you think you still have the understanding of the reality of the locals and the connection with the people and Network?

Actually, my understanding of the work of CD has been moving towards seeking a bigger connection with the Network more and more during my time in the house. With the first year dedicating all my energy to strengthening the thematic work, to the second year, trying to juggle a lot of different external inputs that can bring something great to AEGEE – I was continuously seeking connection with the members, to make sure I always have a reality check on my work. Understanding the needs of our Network has always been a challenge, but initiatives like “CD on Track” have given me strong insights into what really matters: I am amazed by the work of all our volunteers in the AEGEE locals. I enjoyed doing “What is AEGEE” workshops for new members and being back at a university fair promoting AEGEE to students. I wish I could visit the locals more, and bring more insight from the head office directly to them.

Populism is happening now in Europe, and we had an EPM about it. Do you think it is also a problem in AEGEE – do you think populism exists in AEGEE?

I am curious how we increased the Network’s understanding of populism during the EPM: did we also have the chance to discuss objectively the negative and the positive elements of populist movements or actions? Did we just condemn populism as being bad or did we explore the other side of the spectrum as well? Have we tried to understand the psychological drives that make people so receptive to populist narratives and how it cannot be labelled as good or bad? I admit to making statements myself that resemble populist narratives – and I do so for provocation. It is a tool to strike up more straightforward conversations, to try to discuss and analyse things together. Let’s question, let’s debate, let’s reform. But let’s do it together.

Are you a team player? Do you think your CD team sees you as a team player?

There are different roles in normal team dynamics that one can take. I take the role of team support usually. The person the others can rely on under any circumstances or hardships and the person who bears the final responsibility for the things finished/unfinished.

When you think of the work of CD, you need to imagine an environment where you are friends/colleagues/flatmates at the same time and you are as much dreamers as you are the executive board and head of administration of an organisation of 10.000 members.

My CD team does not always find me a team player in its normal translation, but they know they can always rely on me. I make conscious decisions every time I oppose or am critical towards things; I received the mandate and trust of the Agora to guide things in the organisation to the best of my knowledge, skills and experience. We learn together with the CD by challenging each other and understanding that there is not black and white, good or bad sides of any story.

How do you understand the vision of AEGEE? Do you have a political vision for Europe and what is it? What are the three biggest European challenges and how can AEGEE respond to them?

AEGEE is meant to be the driver of change in Europe, the organisation that redefines the status quo of the European integration project. You don’t believe me? The fact that AEGEE operates as a network of cities is a political statement of its own! We challenge the way societies are built, we connect cities and communities that are influenced by national policies but are units with their own governance and management. The future of Europe relies on the power of the cities – where the real people are, where the real conversations and real change can happen!

Europe should rethink its political construction by turning more power back to the citizens, by strong educational policies, strong measures to balance inequalities between member states, and even raising Europe’s status as a global actor. All this can and should only happen however, with the citizens’ contribution and awareness. Erasmus has built a generation that breaks down borders, now it is time this generation also takes a bigger role in leading the process of revitalising Europe.

The three biggest challenges Europe faces right now can be analysed under many lenses – but maybe it is more important to notice the pattern of history that is repeating itself. Citizens losing trust in the system, the fear of the unknown and new cultures “invading”, the yearning for security and protection; these social factors have always provided fertile soil for extremist movements to rise.  How can we anticipate the citizens’ reactions and make sure to build a powerful counter-narrative that re-establishes their faith? Not by new campaign promises, but on the level of emotional connection? They need to see the passion of the youth redefining the status quo and we need to remind ourselves of the values Europe has been built upon.

What’s your leadership style? How would you describe yourself as a leader?

I would say I am a strategic leader. A lot of thinking goes into my actions, yet I rely a lot on knowledge and intuition as well, all in service of the vision and higher purpose. I read people with care and try to understand the motivation behind their actions, so I am able to work with them. Thinking cannot be the strongest trait, yet careful deliberation of causes and consequences has to be part of the management of an organisation. I try to be the safety net for people and accommodate their everyday functioning, comfort them and talk to them when they need support.

I am a visionary person, but a pragmatic idealist at the same time. The visionary side of mine is someone who should come forward more often but it really depends on the right environment and people around me. We all feel spaces and people we just connect with, aspire to be and feel good around. I have a really good feeling about some of the people who are running for the Comité Directeur during this Agora, and I believe we would be able to accomplish great things together.

In your application you said you can’t ‘get a life’ because AEGEE needs fixing. Does it mean that if you are elected, you will run for President again next year if AEGEE is not ‘fixed’ yet?

I am preparing for this Agora with the calmness of knowing clearly what I believe in and what I stand for. I believe in the transformative change that AEGEE can make in Europe, as well as I stand for the change that needs to happen inside the organisation in order to make Europe happen. I am ready to give one more year with the most knowledge on the organisation and in the external world, but this year will be dedicated to rebuilding internally.

I will probably not get to see the long-term outcomes of a transformed and strong AEGEE, it will take years to grow. In this new system, the change we want to see in Europe is the only long-term objective we will put forward. We can continue exploring Europe, we can organise bigger and better events, we can join case study trips, we can let our youth and energy run freely and build a better Europe by every new member joining, every new city that welcomes an AEGEE local.

I will not be President any more when this becomes a reality – but I can play my role in setting the course towards this direction.

Regarding your proposal to delay the new strategic plan by one year, we have some questions:

Thank you for all of you under “we”. This is probably the most critical point listed in my analysis and I understand all the concerns raised below. I will try to explain my reasons but I would also like to invite you to find me for a chat on Facebook/Skype/whatever works for you.

(a) Working Groups:

You wrote in your document that you personally don’t feel well about the new working groups. If we were to change the system that Agora adopted, what is going to be the role of the WG? What are they going to do? What is going to be the support for different WG? What is going to happen with all those people who had made a real effort to make these WG real in the new Strategic Plan? What do you want them to do this year?

The Working Groups would go back to their original loose structure (similar to current interest groups) where people can play with ideas, discuss and realise projects together when they want to take bigger initiatives. WGs have always been key to bridging the gap between the local and European levels because of their easy-to-access nature. WGs could also request financial support from AEGEE-Europe for their activities as well.

If a motion would stop the Strategic Plan from coming into effect, the people who wanted to work on the topic can still continue working on it. Would the motion really change your interest in the topic you want to contribute to? Would it really change your belief, would it make you feel less passionate? You are free to realise projects with the others, organise events for your local, organise street actions, campaigns… there is nothing standing in your way.

(b) Action Agenda Coordination Committee:

ACT will not have any impact to measure, is this EB going to disappear next year? What is going to happen with all the members already committed with this EB during 2017-18 term?

The AEGEE locals are organising a lot of amazing activities that can and already are being used for impact measurement. The only difference would be that we will not read out in the presentation, which AA objective is fulfilled, which one is half-fulfilled and which objective is not fulfilled.

The people who were active and engaged during the EPM in drafting are also free to pursue the ideas they came up with by local activities, attending more training courses, discussing with AEGEE members during the events. The Action Agenda does not give permission to do things, it gives direction. Even without the AA, there is nothing standing in active members’ way to take action.

(c) Others:
What is going to happen with all the time and money spent during PM León, EPM Zagreb, Agora Chisinau and Agora Enschede? What is AEGEE going to be without the thematic part in all the events? Are we going to have EPM 2018? Agoras or other events won’t discuss anything related to the thematic part? Will we just discuss topics related to the AEGEE bureaucracy? How can locals and other European Bodies recruit new members if we only focus on the structure and bureaucracy? How are we going to start after a year’s gap with everything planned so far? What is going to be the main difference between AEGEE and other international associations without a strategic plan?

Money and time have been spent on exploring what AEGEE members are passionate about, yet only a small part of the membership has been reached (based on data). The thematic work of the organisation would not be stopped – how could it be? We have active interest groups, some active working groups and projects, and they are not bound to a document that has been loosely followed for the last decade.  Of course, we will have EPM with a thematic topic of the Agora’s choice, of course we will have thematic discussion at events. We have the freedom to realise any actions we want as long as it follows the values of AEGEE; thematic activities are our very essence, and what would make us stand out would be the action we take and not the nicely worded internal documents we adopt for ourselves.

(d) Regarding to your proposal of changing the format of NWM:
Could you explain us a little more about the idea about 70/30% of English / national language?

The idea stems from my genuine curiosity how we understand inclusion and empowerment in AEGEE. While many of our events on the local level are in the local language, or some in English, there are also those events where we should be strategic and keep the main objective in mind. Meaning, if the Network Meeting’s main purpose is to give space for locals to connect, to share and learn together, we need to make sure everyone feels included equally.

Many AEGEEans speak good English but if you have just one friend around who is telling you they are not speaking up because they are not comfortable with their English, this person might have amazing ideas for the development of the network that we will not learn about. Network Meetings should provide more space for opening up and honest discussions, and using your national language could comfort you more in certain situations more than listening to English-speaking trainings half of the day, but not feel connected to it.

You talk a lot about going back to the past and to the roots of AEGEE, using tools and structures from the past. Do you think they fit into the current context and the society we are living in now?

I strongly believe understanding our past, the challenges and victories can bring us valuable lessons to have mechanisms and face challenges of the present with knowledge of our capabilities. I don’t think the past practices fit any more, but their stories are both cautionary tales as well as serve as great source of inspiration to solidify our identity. Our identity of a network of change-makers.

The most important mechanism I have learnt from all the time digging into the past was that we need to aim for simplicity in our functioning and need to have a clear identity to feel for what we strive for as a Network. The society we are living in now is a high-functioning information society where your brand and the key message of your actions need to be clear and simple. We can grab the very essence of AEGEE’s existence and simplify its message to overcome this challenge.

Your candidature sounds a bit like a description of problems in AEGEE. Can you mention what will be your priorities and concrete solutions for all these problems?

My AEGEE State of Play document wants to provide the context for my candidature which is in the official form. Since I am running for a third year in the board, I saw a huge responsibility in my actions to show that I know what I am talking about when I propose ideas and improvement points that AEGEE needs.

I hope I made some modifications in the document though, that the priorities for the solutions are also a bit more clear:

• Needs-based approach towards a Growth Plan for AEGEE to strengthen the organisational structure
• Simplification of the structure – align our priorities, train our members in organisational bodies, find more resources for the thematic activities!
• AEGEE Identity: what unites us as a Network, what is our niche that makes us unique?

Since all three things above are going deep into AEGEE’s current functioning, the change should happen with the awareness, understanding, cooperation and cohesion of the Network.

If I understood your vision correctly, one of the current obstacles to AEGEE’s health according to you is that a lot of things are being done top down. Now, one solution you offer is taking a year off from the Strategic Plan. This process feels like it could become very top down itself and it could kill AEGEE as we know it and the enthusiasm of the members. How are you planning to prevent this?

AEGEE has seen top-down changes for the last ten years with one reform implemented after the other, mostly top-down. What I stand for is the change that provokes and needs everyone’s attention, one comprehensive review that would include all actors of this network, in order to have a realistic overview of where AEGEE stands now, what is our capacity to grow and how to make it happen. I highlight the importance of involving everyone so that the final outcome is something we all own and feel for. This does not mean of course, that the whole Network would work on internal structural reform, no. I need one representative from each local and European Bodies to bring the voices of everyone to the table. In the meantime, the rest of the members can continue pursuing all the action and fun they wanted to explore in AEGEE.

You can read her full candidature here.

Written by Federica Soro, AEGEE-Cagliari

As a professional developer, Fabrizio Bellicano from AEGEE-Genova has been very active on all IT-related aspects of AEGEE-Europe since 2014. But his commitment does not end there: he was among the organisers of EPM Zagreb and is a member of the newly revived Human Resources Committee. Now he is candidating as member of the Comité Directeur, and we interviewed him about his candidature and his programme.

The AEGEEan: What is the thing that over time you find most motivating in AEGEE?

Fabrizio: I am impressed about the potential that this organisation could reach, and the impact that has on its members (only on its members.. for now).

If you had to summarise why you are candidating in two sentences, what would you say?

To empower people, and to shape the future of European youth.

You are a professional developer. What do you think your professional experience can give AEGEE and what do you think a year in the CD could give you?

The main contribution I can give is of course technical: knowing what tools but also what methodology is best for a specific task. However, I am also a listener and a thinker, and I notice many things: for instance that people are hiding too much under the “oh, but I am a volunteer” shield even though they decided to take responsibility. I am planning to make it clear that there is a line between volunteering and having a work ethic, and the way to do that is to make work more fun and enjoyable. After all, we all claim that we join AEGEE not only for the fun, but also to get useful real-life experience for our future. Well it is time to demonstrate it! Since that is going to be my non-technical contribution, I expect to hone my soft skills in the meanwhile: while I am comfortable in speaking in front of an Agora, speaking now to the whole Network is a different scale!

Your programme is really ambitious. If you had to pick just one main goal, what would it be and why?

The creation of an AEGEE working culture, where work actually means fulfilling one’s responsibility (possibly in a fun environment). Work does not mean seriousness, work means achieving the objectives set: why not have fun during it?

In your mind map you ideally indicate no more than seven hours of work per day. Do you think that is achievable, considering that one of the main struggles of CD is the work-life balance?

I believe the CD has become too central in AEGEE: the CD should only coordinate the real workers, the Committees (the supporting bodies by definition). Unfortunately this is not happening: the IT Committee is 30% functional ever since I joined; the Human Resources Committee (HRC) is just being revamped (Andrea, Ana, Svenja – love), the Public Relations Committee (PRC) is not handling all it could/should (locals are still not Visual Identity (VI) compliant, so they are spending so much time on it). The result is that the CD needs to do it itself. My idea certainly cannot be implemented within one year only, but by promoting a culture in which people actually want to join Committees (to do real things, not for their public image), this will become more affordable. That said, it is also psychological: a happy worker is a productive worker, but a busy worker does not mean s/he does things.

You mention that you want to achieve “healthy habits (…) to make us willing to follow them”. How would you pursue that?

This has so many aspects that I do not know where to actually start. Probably the most clear is the “recognition culture” that we don’t have. When was last time that somebody thanked a specific local or person for something they have done? When was last Agora that you’ve heard “the next Agora will be hosted by AEGEE-X but thanks to AEGEE-Y and AEGEE-Z who put themselves in play and applied to host our most important event”? I just read an email thanking “all the locals who participated to the AEGEE Day”: who are they? I know that starting with the habit of saying “Thank you”, the motivation can increase greatly. What happens instead is that at Agorae, you can only see people getting on stage to throw excrements at each other, or stating their opinion instead of leading by example. This has to change.

Knowledge transfer is a well-known struggle in AEGEE. Can you elaborate on how you would envision it?

An important role into that will be taken by a new IT system (O RLY?), but before having it ready (we are almost there, by the way. Thanks to Nico, Flaviu, Sergey, Derk – but really, only four people who joined in the last two years?) I will take care of some “quick wins” both in IT perspective and on the HR side. IT-wise, new services popping out every time (thanks to cheap/free/NGO discounts for always-more-common technology and services) will make it possible to “renew” the IT infrastructure, where tools can be installed and maintained more easily. HR-wise, it is about fostering cooperation between locals for real – not just pretending to exchange best practices at Network Meetings with only a SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) session. Exchanges between antennae should not be just “A goes to B to party, then B goes to A to party”, but have some content: and not by statute or by regulations or whatever, but simply because it is NICE to do so.

Questions from the Network

We know that the final task division will be done only during the Knowledge Transfer, but what is the position you would like to cover?

‘Classic’ positions are a myth; responsibilities shift between positions all the time. That is why I talked about things I want to tackle, so to apply my transversal skills; that is why I have put forth questions I want to solve, instead of just a “named position”. I believe my tasks are mainly focused towards human resources, though not necessarily stay in that field and instead expand to communications (I want to be involved in everything we do as a team and act as its motivator) or into IT, undoubtedly the most neglected part of the organisation in the last three/nine years.

What is your experience in writing grants?

I don’t have any. I believe this question comes from my (probably unclear) point in the mind map about applying to as many grants as possible: what I was thinking of in particular is simply that we should promote the culture of fundraising – as in, it does *not* mean begging (as some cultures perceive it). Thus, again, my focus is into changing the mindset (for the locals), not really into applying for grants (for AEGEE-Europe).

You can read his full candidature here.

Written by Federica Soro, AEGEE-Cagliari

Jesús Baizán Barnabá has been a member of AEGEE-Oviedo for two years now, and he was a SubCommissioner of the Juridical Commission of AEGEE-Europe for the term 2016-2017. Now he wants to take his passion for law one step further by candidating as full-time member of the JC. We interviewed him about his candidature and his programme. 

The AEGEEan: How would you describe yourself with your initials?

Jesús: If I have to describe myself with my initials I would say “Juridical Beast”. My family is full of lawyers, justice assistants, policemen and guardias civiles [Spanish law enforcement body, ed.], and I do believe in the importance of the rule of law and the paper of the State officers. I participated in three different legal internships related to different types of law and I am totally sure I want to dedicate my professional life to being a functionary.

Why should people vote for you?

Being a person with that background, I do believe I could contribute to the JC and, as I said in my candidature, the next period between July and February I am going to dedicate my time to study English and Dutch, so I will have plenty of time.

What has your experience as JC SubCommissioner taught you until now? How would your routine change if you were elected?

As JC SubCommissioner, I learnt how the JC works: checking statuses, taking over Committee Elections, how to discuss legal issues internally, the operation of the register system and the close relation between the JC and the CD in order to solve problems as soon as possible. If I get elected, my plan is spending my time on language studies, working out at the gym and the rest of my time until February can be used properly in taking care of the JC duties.

What did you learn during your Election Observation Mission? How would you translate that knowledge into the JC work?

During my Election Observer Mission in Macedonia, I acquired different theoretical knowledge like the principles of Transparency, Impartiality, Rule of Law or Respect to the National Sovereignty and practical knowledge like which details you do have to observe to analyse if everything is going correctly. We cannot forget that the principal aim of AEGEE is the personal development of our members, and having a little background related to the OSCE observation method is good.

Could you give us an example of a mistake in the statuses you found (no names, just a real case scenario) and how you would improve that?

The biggest mistake that comes to my mind was ignoring to mention the financial obligations of the local with AEGEE-Europe, or the most typical cases are fails due to the use of automatic translators without a proper check before sending it. Our members have no obligation to know how to redact their statuses, for this reason I think that elaborating a template with all the basic criteria to have acceptable statutes will be helpful for everyone. In this template I would like to add some tips like “check the automatic translation if you used it” or “ask to your sub-commissioner before sending the statutes if you have any doubt”.

How do you envision cooperation and KT with future SubCommissioners?

My will is to continue with the same system followed by the current JC, consulting most of the issues with the SubCommissioners, giving them the opportunity to act directly in the legal work of the Commission, answering their questions… Basically, it consists in giving them voice and the right to explain their opinion. However, there is a new thing I would like to implement in the SubCommissioners programme. It is doing like the Audit Commission or the Network Commission and distributing the Network between the SubCommissioner, in order to get a closer relationship between the JC and the locals. But anyways, I would like to know before what Monika and Veronika (or the other possible candidates) think about that.

You can read his full candidature here.

Written by Federica Soro, AEGEE-Cagliari

Monika Mojak from AEGEE-Warszawa and AEGEE- Lublin is at the end of her term as president of the Juridical Commission of AEGEE-Europe, but she is candidating for a second term because she feels she still has much to offer to the JC. We interviewed her about her candidature and her programme. 

The AEGEEan: President of the JC, attorney-in-law trainee, AEGEE enthusiast: what do we still don’t know about you?

Monika: Besides law, I study international relations, that I found very interesting thanks to AEGEE.  When I find some free time (which is not easy) I am trying to write my master’s thesis. Moreover, I am an animal lover and I am engaged in some activities aimed to their protection. Sometimes I test my cooking skills on my family and friends or I play the piano (unfortunately for my neighbours). Like every AEGEEan, I cannot imagine my live without travels, adventures, and great people around me.  I am also a big fan of the 80s, French movies, English literature, Mediterranean cuisine, and everything made of chocolate.

Why should people vote for you?

I am passionate about the JC, I left a big part of my heart here and I can say that I really love working for it. I believe that when you find something interesting, it naturally increases your willingness to perform your tasks better and put 100% of your effort, but at the same time it gives you a lot of satisfaction and energy, especially when you can help other people. I am happy for what I do, and I still feel motivated to contribute to the JC more. I think that the combination of my skills, practice and knowledge can be very useful here and will help in further JC development.

You say being president of the JC was challenging. Could you give us some example?

For me, the greatest challenge of being the president is the fact of how many people rely on you, on your knowledge, skills and you as a person. That is why I wanted to ensure that everybody in the JC felt good and the atmosphere was nice, that our decisions were objective, just and in the best interest for those who were affected by them, and that people were satisfied about how the JC operates in general.  I am trying to do my best not to disappoint people.

How did the past year in the JC help you develop and what do you think can still be improved?

It was a very intense time in my life.  Of course, I learned a lot, I gained many new skills and experience that can be helpful in my future activities. But what I found the most important are all those fantastic people I met, and with whom I had a chance to work and cooperate. They gave me a lot of support, inspiration, and motivation. Sometimes they pushed me to go beyond my own limits that turned into new ideas and plans that I would like to put into practice now. Thanks to them I got new energy and enthusiasm to work harder, to keep on going with what I really like doing, to believe that nothing is impossible and everything depends on us alone. This is priceless.

I found working with the JC team great. Everybody is very motivated and hard-working, we learn from each other, we support each other, exchanging knowledge and opinions. But mostly, we are good friends. Then, our cooperation is working well. But sometimes we should increase the speed of our actions. Some cases demand precise research and time, but I am also aware that in some cases our decisions affect the operating of other bodies and we should think how to divide our work and the tasks we have to become more efficient.  I have some ideas how to improve it, and I really hope I will have an opportunity to put them into practice soon.

You plan to bring the JC closer to the Network. Do you already have some ideas in store?

I have noticed that many AEGEEans have only a general overview about our commission.  But at the same time, I was happy to discover that many, many of them are really interested in how we work, what are our tasks and role within the association and how they could get involved. That is why I would like to take care about the new website, where people could find all the important and updated information about our body. I also believe that nothing could bring the JC closer to the Network than direct contact. I would like to get the JC involved in more activities held during AEGEE events, where we can present ourselves, be more visible, meet with people just to talk with them, answer their questions and dispel the doubts they have relating all legal issues.

The second and very important thing is the fact that many members still don’t know a lot about the CIA. The CIA is extensive and can be incomprehensible for those who do not have legal background, and this is understandable. But this is the essential document that regulates the most important aspects and sets a base for our activities within AEGEE. And our role as JC is showing that the CIA is not as black as it is painted and that the knowledge about the CIA is important and helpful for all of us.  For this reason, I would really like to work on some JC guidelines, where members could find all the basic and most important information regarding the CIA. I am also thinking about workshops that we could have during Agora, NWMs, SUs and any other events, when people learn more about the JC and the CIA, but can also get some useful legal knowledge needed in their daily life.

You mention that you were not able to put all your ideas into practice in the past year. What would you like to implement if you were elected?

I would like to work on all the tools that can help bring the JC closer to all the members. As I mentioned before, this is a new website, an updated Facebook page, JC sessions during events, useful CIA presentations and our activities to help people understand our role in AEGEE.

You can read her full candidature here.

Written by Federica Soro, AEGEE-Cagliari

Network Commissioner for the Nedertop and former member of the Action Agenda Coordination Committee, Loes Rutten from AEGEE-Utrecht is now candidating as President of AEGEE-Europe. We reached out to her for this interview and also asked her the questions we received from the Network.

The AEGEEan: The issue of active participation of members has been on the table for quite some time now. How do you think we can achieve that?

Loes: It is crucial that everybody who joins AEGEE understands that our organisation is completely built on the work of volunteers, and it is the role of current members to encourage new members to contribute. In order for a new member to become active, the newbie has to understand well what tasks the board is working on, and how he/she can contribute. At the same time the board has to recognise what skills new members bring to the team, what they are passionate about and what they still have to learn in order to grow. Each local needs a human resource strategy that incorporates this. NetCom, HRC, AEGEE-Academy are the supportive bodies which should jump in when locals have trouble developing such a strategy or lack the knowledge to implement it.

How do you think the balance between time-efficient actions and a horizontal structure can be kept?

Good question. I believe that within the CD, a horizontal structure leads to time-efficient actions because all CD members will feel ownership of our work. However, there is a clear trade-off between time efficiency and maintaining a horizontal structure in our Network. My answer is effective consultation through careful planning. If we plan the topics of discussion within the CD ahead, we can create enough time to gather opinions from relevant actors in the Network through consultations, before making a decision. It is the responsibility of the CD to not only communicate the last month’s CD decisions, but also to share upcoming agenda topics, and to clearly communicate how members can give input. I imagine having a regular (e.g. monthly) Hangout with interested AEGEE members to discuss topics that are on the agenda. This plan can only succeed if we are able to communicate clearly and provide sufficient information in due time for members to give feedback.

In the rapid shift of generations of members, very useful knowledge might get lost. How would you plan to keep the knowledge transfer effective?

We already have a treasure of materials and toolkits on the members portal, but somehow we tend to forget this! The key of ‘knowledge transfer’ is not ‘knowledge’, but ‘transfer’. We should invest in a stronger backbone of knowledge transfer in AEGEE. Some ideas: to have a ‘patron’ for each newly starting project or team, who can help to get the new team started. At the end of a cycle of any team it should be a habit to write down the main outcomes and recommendations in a document for the next team. We should encourage locals to have advisory boards, and provide mentors from outside the locals if there are no more experienced members to support the board. We shouldn’t fall into the trap of bureaucratising knowledge transfer. Rather than that, it is important to maintain human contact with experienced members when they leave AEGEE, so we can ask their help whenever we need their advice.

You mention the introduction of best practices picked up in other associations. Could you give us an example of where you see room for improvement in AEGEE and what would you keep instead?

I think we can make it more clear to new members that we are a volunteer organisation. After coming back from a year of volunteering in India and Bolivia, my non-profit sending organisation (SIW – Internationale vrijwilligersprojecten) clearly communicated that they would appreciate my help to promote the NGO and to share my experience with other people. In many of our locals, we don’t manage to keep track of people that went on Summer University even though their extra pairs of hands are so valuable to us.

One thing that is typical for AEGEE is to always complain about internal things. ‘We should reform the Agora, we should change our thematic structure, the CD is so disconnected’. Although we should be proud that we create such critical thinking members, in other associations that I was part of, members spend a larger fraction of time on doing things, rather than just thinking on how to do them.

One thing that doesn’t require direct improvement, but that we should always be aware of, is the way that we put Europe in context with the rest of the world. Having lived periods of several months in India, Bolivia and Iran, I sometimes find it striking that we still believe that Europe is the only and the best continent in the world. The vision of AEGEE is interconnected with western European values. We should avoid preaching our values to people from other cultures without practicing true efforts to understand their culture and history. This would be a form of European patriarchy that is contrary to our mission to foster mutual understanding. Rather, I would encourage more people from outside Europe to join our events and, if possible, send groups of AEGEEans outside of Europe. This year’s Europe on Track project and the conference “Education for the Present, Democracy for the Future” that took place in Budapest had participants from outside Europe. I really think that this diversity is an added value and I would like to see more of that in the future.

You put the emphasis on finding common ground with your fellow CD members and taking a personal approach to the job. Why do you think this is important and how do you plan to do it?

It is important that all of the CD members believe in what we are doing during the upcoming year. We may have different expectations and somewhat different visions, but we all want to give everything we have to work for AEGEE and to improve the organisation in small steps every day. Whenever there is a disagreement and people have opposite views, we have to come back to our common ground of good intentions for AEGEE and continue in a direction that everybody is motivated to work for.

It is well-known that the work-life balance of CD members tends to be crazy. Which concrete steps would you take to ensure that a healthy balance is maintained?

I believe that people perform best when they are in good mental and physical health. As CD we are going to build up enormous amounts of stress that needs to be released regularly. If we don’t allow ourselves space to breath, this stress will become chronic and this will impede our ability to work on the long run. I would like to encourage my team to find a fun activity in Brussels that can take their mind off work every now and then. What this activity is, depends on each person. I would like to go swimming regularly, maybe someone else wants to do yoga, dance, sing in a choir or beat the hell out of a boxing ball. I have been through periods of overloading myself with work and I learnt that making time for human breaks is the best way to continue to work hard, even if it sounds contradictory. I think it is the role of the president to keep track of the health of the team members and to understand when to encourage people to work harder, and when to drag them out of the office for a break.

Another basic human need is privacy, which the house obviously lacks. I would like to explore the possibilities to arrange the house in such a way that we create more private space. By the start of the term, the roof of the attic should be fixed, which means we can take the guest room back into use and we will have the attic as an additional space. As a team, we have to get to know each other well, so we understand when and how we can give each other the personal space we need.

“Human resources and internal education are two closely connected weaknesses of AEGEE, but there is hope”. Could you elaborate more?

The ideal human resource cycle can be memorised as: new member joins, learns about AEGEE, becomes active and learns new skills, joins the board, transfers the knowledge and eventually retires. Two key points are that the boards should know how to encourage new members to be active and that the new members should have the opportunity to learn. This requires an educated board, so that the board is able to educate their members. The fact that more and more people point out HR and internal education as weaknesses of our organisation shows not only that there is a challenge here, but also that people see the need to fix it. The Human Resources Committee redefined itself this year after a period of less activity. Together with the CD, NetCom and the AEGEE Academy they are working on aligning our internal education strategy with the current needs of the Network. If the HRC continues to grow, the committee can take back responsibilities from the overloaded CD and Network Commission, so that the topic of HR receives the full attention it needs in order to improve the current situation for the locals.

Questions from the Network

How do you understand the vision of AEGEE? Do you have a political vision for Europe and what is it? What are the three biggest European challenges and how can AEGEE respond to them?

a) AEGEE envisions a European continent whose citizens feel connected and integrated. We provide a platform for young people to explore Europe’s diversity through human contact. By encouraging our members to participate actively in our association, we also shape their minds and provide them the space to grow competences that allow them to take part in a democratic society in the rest of their lives.

b) I hope to see Europe grow into an even more peaceful continent, where despite its turbulent past, and in some cases, present, we are able to tolerate each other. Our democratic societies should have strong civil movements. I see a certain standardisation of civic education is a prerequisite for this. The European institutions should facilitate bottom-up initiatives, rather than enforce policies top-down.

c) Polarisation is one of the biggest challenges in our societies today. If you look at voting statistics from the Brexit referendum, the EU-Ukraine referendum in the Netherlands and the presidential election in France, there is a clear gap between cities and countryside and between young and old generations. This polarisation causes us to live in different realities. As a youth organisation, AEGEE could try harder to involve more young people from outside university environments. Youngsters living in a village are less likely to find themselves in an international environment, and may be more hesitant to join international exchanges like the ones we organise in AEGEE. Still if we manage to let them join our events, they will be contaminated with our enthusiasm and feel what really means to be European.

One of the main challenges related specifically to EU-countries is the democratic deficit in the EU. The reason that many citizens have lost trust in the institutions is that they feel that they don’t have any influence over decision making. This causes a backlash of support for nationalistic parties. In order to restore trust in the institutions, we should not only inform people about the benefits of the EU, but also listen to their concerns. We should think critically how we can make the voices of citizens heard inside the EU institutions, even if this involves changes in the current structure of the EU institutions themselves. As AEGEE we can challenge ourselves by starting a dialogue with movements that are less supportive of the EU and inform ourselves why they see things differently. Also, it would be interesting to have an event where we redraw the European project from scratch. In this field we can also strengthen our cooperation with the Association des Amis de Franck Biancheri (AAFB).

A third challenge is the spread of biased news on social media. Forming an informed opinion takes more effort nowadays, because we are most likely to read news articles expressing opinions that we already believe in. Our opinion is based on the information we have, and therefore our opinions are bound to differ depending on the social group we are in, as well as from country to country. As AEGEEans, the key answer to this problem lies in the geographical size of our network and in our ability to speak different languages. Imagine forming a team of AEGEEans from different countries monitoring the way that news are presented in different media, and translating key articles from their own language to English. This will allow us to understand what information different parts of Europe receive, and why therefore our opinions differ. Maybe some members of The AEGEEan and the Language Interest Group would be interested in contributing to this?

What’s your leadership style? How would you describe yourself as a leader?

My leadership style is that of a democratic leader. If we want the whole CD, and the whole Network, to feel ownership of plans, our common opinion should matter more than my personal one. I am not saying this because it makes me sound like a nice person. I am saying this because together we know more and therefore we can take better decisions together. I can identify strengths in each person and put trust in them, which motivates people. During discussions I stay calm and rational, and focus on finding solutions. I am the opposite of a bulldog, although that doesn’t mean that I let people walk all over me. I think that this is the type of leadership that a volunteer organisation as AEGEE-Europe needs.

What is your experience in writing grants?

None. I will have to learn this during the knowledge transfer period. This worries me as much as it may worry you, but I am eager to find out more about it. Fortunately, I have had quite some practice in academic writing in English which will definitely help. I think that generally the knowledge of AEGEE members on writing grants is lacking, so this is also a competence that needs investment this year.

Are you a team player? Do you think your NetCom team sees you as a team player?

I think so! As a Network Commissioner you always have to balance your time over work with the locals, work with the NetCom team, studies and personal life. The first few months of being a Network Commissioner, I invested most of my time in getting to know my locals. I visited 13 boards from Groningen to Lyon and I was the initiator of the ‘Think before you Vink’ information campaign preceding the Dutch EU-Ukraine referendum. During this period I had difficulties to fully contribute to the team, but afterwards I became much more involved. In the second part of the term I joined the speaker team and we had a good atmosphere in the team. In Agora Chișinău I decided to candidate for another term because I wanted to provide continuity for the team. Within the team we have a good common understanding of balancing our NetCom tasks with studies and personal life. We all miss a weekly meeting from time to time, but we still manage to get big amounts of work done all together.

Running for the presidency is a very important and tough decision. Why did you wait until the very last minute to upload your candidature? Do you think the Network should consider your candidature valid?

‘Running for presidency is a very important and tough decision.’ – I completely agree. Although I uploaded my candidature in the last moment, the process of making the decision did start earlier. I took the time to consult current and former CD members and weighed the pros and cons of quitting my studies despite my family opposing that decision. I wanted to be really sure of myself before making my candidature public. Imagine candidating, and having people candidate with me because they would like to work with me, and then withdrawing my candidature later on because I didn’t properly think it through, causing other people to rethink their candidatures as well. This scenario would have been worse in my opinion. Also, I thought that the candidatures could not be edited later on. I was changing capital letters in the last minutes, unaware of the fact that I could simply edit my candidature (or even start writing it) after submitting it. It is up to the network to accept my candidature, but I wouldn’t say that I candidated impulsively.

Let’s pretend for a minute that you didn’t decide last minute to run, therefore you had time to write and upload your candidature. In terms of fair play, do you think it’s fair to accept your candidature even if it was late?

Tricky question. Deadlines are there for a reason and I do think it is a good sign that my late candidature started a discussion on the general culture of missing deadlines in AEGEE. It was not professional, as a president ought to be. However, it is also important in a democratic organisation to be able to choose between multiple candidates for such an important position as president. If there is only one candidate, how will you know whether this person is elected because people really support the candidature, or whether there was simply no one else to vote for? I would be happy to have an opponent because this forces you to really think through your vision, your programme, your strengths, and your opponent candidate will of course also focus on your weaknesses. Therefore, I think my 14 seconds late candidature should be accepted, but that is ultimately up to the Agora.

Your position towards the Strategic Plan is the opposite of your opponent. You were in the NetCom for a year and a half. Can you state in all honesty that the Strategic Plan and Action Agenda are a shared objective of our Network?

I wouldn’t say that my position is completely opposite, but it is more moderate. We are trying to find the balance between freedom for locals to organise whatever inspires them, and a more focused structure that allows us to have a more effective impact on a smaller number of areas. We always have to keep asking ourselves if the structure we have fits with the reality of how our organisation functions. I believe that the organisational part of the Strategic Plan is a good reflection of the current challenges of our association and is a useful backbone for the CD to implement long-term changes that were proposed by the Network. I think that locals are in favour of having thematic focus areas, however changing the yearly objectives by means of the Action Agenda seems to work better for Working Groups than for locals.

What matters now, is that thanks to the input of many members, the new Focus Areas are already chosen, the Action Agenda is drafted, we have strong candidates for Working Group Coordinators and members that are showing interest to join their teams. We should not overthrow a system that many people are already motivated to work with. However, if many members believe that our thematic structure is one that requires rethinking, we can use next year to let a ‘thematic reform task force’ tackle this. I predict that if you start from scratch and design a system with some ‘focus‘ and some ‘freedom’, you end up again with a construction with two levels of thematic groups whose topics are redefined in certain time intervals. For now, let us give a fair chance for the current system with Working Groups and an Action Agenda. We should also recognise that this will be only the third year that Working Groups exist and we are still learning how to optimise the current system.

Our Network is losing locals and we have at our disposal an increasingly smaller pool of active people. What do you think are the reasons and what can be solutions to it?

Some people say that the problem is that currently students have less resources to travel. I think it is the opposite, people don’t need AEGEE to go on a cheap trip, so it no longer works to sell it that way. We are no longer the only association that provides cultural and learning experiences. We should focus on what makes us special. We are interdisciplinary. We have no national level. We welcome everyone. Name an interest and we are working on it. And maybe most importantly, we have a vision and a mission that after 32 years are still very relevant to the Europe we live in. We have to believe in what makes us special, in order to transmit the message that our association is unique!

How are you preparing for the role? Did you contact current and former presidents of AEGEE-Europe?

I am mostly in contact with Ola and Paul, and some of the current CD members. They are available for all my questions, which I really appreciate. I am also on good terms with Réka, and we already discussed a possible scenario for knowledge transfer but are giving each other space during the election period.

Although I believe that I have enough experience to be a president, there is still a lot of know-how to be transferred before the 1st of August. Knowledge transfer and team building could already start online from June, and I would move to the house in July. Once I know if I am elected, I would also like to gather input for our activity plan from the Network and European Bodies.

Education in AEGEE is important, yet trainings fail to attract enough people. What do you think is the reason? And how would you solve the problem?

I think this lack of applications is always a combination of factors. Students nowadays have less time to travel to the other side of our continent for a week long training. At the same time, shortening the length of trainings would be a too simple solution, because it will also reduce their depth. However, we live in a modern age, so we could experiment with having online preparation meetings and before the event and online debriefing sessions and follow-up after the event. This way training itself could be shorter despite reaching the same depth. I also think that trainings, like any other event, need a clear PR strategy. If the content, date and location of an event are known in time, locals can promote the event to their members or even use them as a tool to recruit new members. I also support the statement by AEGEE-Academy to revise the European calendar. Besides statutory events, we have Network Meetings, Regional Training Courses, European Schools, Summer University Project Schools and more. It’s amazing that we can pull it off to organise so many training events, but we are ultimately fishing from the same pool of members. With a more efficient planning, we can make sure that there are regular trainings with both trainers and participants.

You can read her full candidature here.

Written by Federica Soro, AEGEE-Cagliari

After one year in Brussels as Secretary General and counless experiences both with her local AEGEE-Nijmegen and at the European level, Svenja van der Tol has been really active in bringing back to life the Human Resources Committee of AEGEE-Europe and she is now candidating as Coordinator of the Youth Development Working Group. We interviewed her about it. 

The AEGEEan: Could you introduce yourself and your story in AEGEE?

Svenja: Besides a master student in Linguistics (although not studying as much as I maybe should [she laughs, ed.]), I am currently the Speaker of the Action Agenda Coordination Committee and responsible for the Agora Mentorship project that was relaunched by the Human Resources Committee. Before these activities, I have done quite some other things in AEGEE, including a year as Secretary General of the Comité Directeur (2015-2016), a year as Secretary of my own local AEGEE-Nijmegen (2012-2013) and being co-Editor-in-Chief of two editions of the Key to Europe (2013-2014 and 2015-2016). There is probably more, but not all of it is interesting to mention here, although you can find the full list in my candidature (hint, hint).

How did you meet with AEGEE?

I joined the introduction period of AEGEE-Nijmegen in 2011, because I had just moved to a new city and I was looking for a way to make new friends. The promised cheap travels and cultural exchanges seemed to be a nice added bonus. I learned rather fast though that AEGEE has a lot more to offer than just meeting people and travelling around Europe, so since then I have accepted it as my crazy, but never the less incredibly loved second family.

What are your plans if you are elected as coordinator of the Youth Development Working Group?

First and foremost, I would like to use my term as coordinator – if elected – to properly define the focus of this completely new Focus Area (pun intended), and especially the task division and specific role of the to-be-established Working Group, since we also have other bodies that are working in this field and I would like to combine rather than waste our resources. Since it is what the Working Groups are supposed to do, it will not be a surprise that I would also like to provide locals and fellow European Bodies with the means and support needed to implement the Action Agenda objectives. The exact actions that will make these two things happen will be decided together with my future team members, since the Working Group is not a one (wo)man show.

How are you going to contribute to this group?

As the coordinator, I consider my task to be the management of resources within the Working Group, meaning that I want to make sure all members can contribute with their own expertise and ideas to the work of the Working Group as a whole, while also ensuring that the Working Group functions as a team in which everyone feels heard and respected. Besides that, I would also feel the responsibility to ensure that an Activity Plan is created and, together with my future team, succesfully implemented.

You worked in many different positions in AEGEE. Which one is the best for you?

I have indeed done quite some things in AEGEE already, but I cannot pick one that is or was the best or most suitable for me. All the experiences I had together have given me the experience that I have right now, and often they have been a support to each other – like how I can use my experience in the Comité Directeur now to support the Network in other ways, such as answering questions that require rather specific knowledge. Having said that, however, for the upcoming year(s?), I would like to orientate myself mostly in the field of internal education and youth development as a whole, since I find these two are very important topics and I see a role for myself there to support them.

You have been really ACTive in the Action Agenda Coordination Committee, why did you decide to focus on Youth Development specifically?

First of all, I was already more involved in this Focus Area during the European Planning Meeting in Zagreb, where I supported the Comité Directeur as Drafting Manager, by attending and moderating the sessions on drafting the objectives for this Focus Area specifically, which gave me a good understanding of the direction the attendants would like to take with it. Besides that, out of personal interest and a strong belief that youth development is the core of many things in AEGEE, I would really like to make the Youth Development Focus Area more than words, but implement it into concrete actions and – pun intended again – developments.

You can read her full candidature here.

Written by Firdevs Cazim