THE EUROPEAN UNION AT 50

By IPS Correspondents and - - Reprint | | Print |

This column is available for visitors to the IPS website only for reading. Reproduction in print or electronic media is prohibited. Media interested in republishing may contact romacol@ips.org.

MIAMI, Mar 21 2007 (IPS) - The 50th anniversary of the Treaty of Rome, signed March 25, 1957, is a perfect excuse to review the accomplishments and shortcomings of today\’s European Union (EU), writes Joaquin Roy, \’\’Jean Monnet\’\’ professor and Director of the European Union Centre of the University of Miami. In this article, Roy writes that the success of the EU is demonstrated by the attraction it exerts on not only the countries that are European (former Yugoslavia, for example), which have the right to join, but also on neighbours that yearn for the elusive membership (Turkey, whose candidacy has been championed by United States). Only one country (Norway) has rejected joining in referendum. Although some doubt the assertion that \’\’democracies don\’t to go war among themselves\’\’, what is certain is that war itself in Europe has not only become \’\’unthinkable\’\’, but also \’\’materially impossible\’\’ (Schuman Declaration) among the members of the EU. The status of sovereignty in the Union, which is not \’\’ceded\’\’ or \’\’lost\’\’, as some claim, but rather shared (or pooled), is the aspect that is least understood outside of the EU. It is also what the stalled Constitution is trying to reinforce.

The anniversary has become an occasion for simultaneously issuing expressions of satisfaction for the road taken and stressing the shortcomings of the project under the current circumstances. Thus complaints have centred especially on the impasse produced by the rejection of the constitutional treaty, the alienation of the citizens, the absence of effective leadership, fears about immigration, doubts about the EU’s identity, and uncertainties in external and internal security. It has even been said that, paradoxically, the EU may disappear because of its lack of purpose: it has fulfilled its primordial mission (to stop the European wars) and may now die of its own success.

From outside the EU, opponents have concentrated on the troubles of the EU, with a double motivation and a central explanation. On the one hand, by stressing the serious problems that beset the European process they fail to note the grave limitations of other experiments in regional integration and simple economic cooperation around the world, most especially in the Americas. On the other hand, by magnifying the negative dimensions, they try to diminish the fears about the competition the EU would constitute in a global economy.

The outsized critiques of the EU frequently reveal a basic ignorance not only of the European process but also of the essence of true regional (political and economic) integration. But what has been systematically played down is the impressive record of the project that has evolved into the EU in comparison with other integration processes.

To begin with, in both theory and practise, the rise and development of the EU has revolutionised the way in which relations among states are considered. Until World War II, and to a certain extent during the Cold War, the essence of international relations revolved around military and economic power. The appearance of the EU in its early manifestations (the ECSC and the EC) placed on the table a new alternative to war as a continuation of ‘politics by other means’, to cite Clausewitz. For the first time since the proposition of a Kantian ‘perpetual peace’, it was possible to consider the conversion of the most violent and warlike continent on the planet into a laboratory of cooperation.

In terms of the ‘functionalist’ method (the mission makes the entity, not the reverse) the EU accomplished peaceably what Napoleonic tenacity and Hitlerian intolerance could not bring about by force: the integration of Europe. At the same time, it presented an alternative to the siren song wafting over from Moscow.

Although some doubt the assertion that ”democracies don’t to go war among themselves”, what is certain is that war itself in Europe has not only become ”unthinkable”, but also ”materially impossible” (Schuman Declaration) among the members of the EU.

With its basic foundational objective totally fulfilled, the EU has triumphed. It has become if not a model to imitate at least a point of reference for any project of regional integration or cooperation, along side initiatives as varied as free-trade zones, customs unions, common markets, and even economic unions — the first four stages of regional integration that precede the utopian ‘political union’.

The success of the EU is demonstrated by the attraction it exerts over not only the countries that are European (former Yugoslavia, for example), which have the right to join, but also neighbours that yearn for the elusive membership (Turkey, whose candidacy has been championed by United States). Only one country (Norway) has rejected joining in referendum.

Since its birth, the EU has been enlarging both in the number of members and in common policies that are managed, without the threat of national veto, by a ‘qualified majority vote’, thanks to the acceptance of the supranational nature of its institutions. The status of sovereignty in the Union, which is not ”ceded” or ”lost”, as some claim, but rather shared (or pooled), is the aspect that is least understood outside of the EU. It is also what the stalled Constitution is trying to reinforce. (END/COPYRIGHT IPS)