FOLLOWING THE EUROPEAN UNION

Well, without independent defense, the EU won't ever become the political world player it sometimes pretends to be - it will still be France, Germany, the UK, Poland who make the final calls.

But far more than a "debating society", the EU (or the monetary union, at least) is an economic world player. Sure, national governments might tinker with breaching European standards a few tenths of a percent this way or that, but fundamentally their policies have long been anchored to the common EU frameworks, tinkering is all they can still do.

Apart from that, the EU (and the UN too, though to a much lesser extent) has already gone a long way beyond the "debating club" stage in that they prescribe a whole range of political standards and conventions, too, which member states will simply have to adhere to - in the case of the EU ranging from measures to protect gay rights to measures to protect the rights of ethnic minorities, from rules on judicial institutional independence to anti-monopoly/cartel controls (etc etc).

The common military command will, I suspect, probably be the very last step of political integration.

Walter

Hey, we can argue or disagree. It just wasnt clear to me what exactly you were arguing me on.

Totally agree on that. (Besides, I HOPE that a common military command WILL be the last step!)

Interesting discussion. The EU remains a confederation of sovereign nations, and its executive commission, directly accountable to the various national governments. It is also true that the incrementalism and 'opt-in or opt-out' strategies, to which Nimh & Walter have referred, have indeed enabled it to make truly remarkable progress towards union, while avoiding serious confrontation over political issues of power, representation, and governance or even a struggle between the EU governmental functions and their various national counterparts.

However, I find it difficult to believe this harmony can be maintained by these devices for much longer. Even a protracted, 'go slow' approach doesn't seem likely to overcome the effects of numerous new member states with increasingly divergent interests confronted with the habits of domination which France and Germany have developed over the last four decades. The increasing body of EU law and the increasing incidence of mandatory jurisdiction of EU courts over local enforcement of that law, also seem likely to increase either nationalist resentment or pressure for direct popular representation in EU governance. The EU has already exceeded what I once thought possible for such a confederation, so I could well be wrong in this. It will be very interesting to observe the eventual resolution of the current struggle over national voting rights in the new commission.

Well, George, yours, timber and (partly) c.i.'s negative thoughts about the EU have to be accepted.
And since I'm neither that good in looking in glass-balls nor in reading the future out of cards...


re EU currency, I found this old document:
In the October 1968 issue of the monthly publication "Communauté européenne", French journalist, Jean Lecerf, compares the Werner Plan with the plan proposed by the Action Committee for the United States of Europe (ACUSE), both of which encourage the Six to adopt a single currency:
Why a European currency?

Walter, None of us has a crystal ball that will predict the outcome of the European Union. Just in simplistic terms, it seems like many of the difficulties confronting this union has more uphill battles than downhill ones. This new political/economic union with so many different interests and abilities seems on the surface to be an almost impossible task. It's probably because we don't understand the political dynamics that have transpired and will continue into the future to make this work. On our side of the ocean, NAFTA has been problematic for all countries concerned in many ways, and we're talking about only three countries - two of which almost speaks the same language.

c.i.

You may not be aware of that, but there are some countries with the same language as well in the EU (Belgium shares the same language with four members ).

As said before, the EU did go on very well in its more than fifty years of existence (starting with the ECSC and later the EEC).

The evolution of the EU is really an interesting phenomenon to watch. It harks to what, maybe, it was somewhat like to be a new citizen of recently post English colony America. Sure the EU is composed of sovereign nations as opposed to mere colonies but we should remember that Virginians, like other colonial citizens, actually felt strongly that their particular colony WAS a sovereign entity if not nation per se. The case for Federalism with a strong central authority vs. a system of separate states similar to the Balkans is duly recorded in "The Federalist", an excellent window into the minds of Madison, John Jay, and Hamilton. (I know, the Balkans is not strictly analogous but this does demonstrate how difficult the ultimate goal of EU unity may ultimately be)

The current effort of establishing an EU constitution also manifests the different concepts envisioned for the final concept of the EU structure. Right now this effort seems relegated to the back burner, at best. But this is probably for the best. After all, neither Rome nor the U.S. Constitution was constructed in a day's time, the latter still open not only to interpretation but also revision.

There are, of course, problems… some more serious than others. The voting system will be worked out. More worrisome is the serial violation by France and Germany of the stability pact. Perhaps it is not so much that these two nations are sinful in this regard but that the pact is somewhat fiscally unrealistic and should be modified or even temporally dropped. The question here is: Is it reasonable to expect other nations economically tied to any nation in fiscal trouble to stand idly by why said nation spirals down a fiscal toilet?

The second concern is the concept of the development of a core Europe when push comes to disagreement. Foreseeing disagreements with those of Eastern Europe some nations are mentally retreating and suggest almost a siege mentality in recommending the existence of a sub group of the founding nations. This implies a united group of nations containing a smaller group with less differences and more commonality of interest. The logical extension of ever smaller nation groups with more similar interests speaks against the concept of the EU in the first place and smacks of Bismarckian alliances.

Will we see. It is easy to criticize such efforts but the EU is moving in the right direction. The big question is: How much tolerance will the core of founding nations exhibit towards the newer members?

America's venture into Middle Eastern political structure has brought to the surface different nations attitudes and philosophies. President Chirac's rebuke of some Eastern European countries will be remembered by them. By the same token the attitudes of such nations such as Poland towards the U.S.'s actions in Iraq are resented by some core states. But in true diplomatic fashion these nations must get past this. Like brothers the nations of the EU must work together for the good of the family.

JM

Letter bombs sent to EU figures

Two suspected letter bombs have been sent to the European police body Europol and European Central Bank head Jean-Claude Trichet, officials say.
more here: link to online article

Another letter bomb, the forth meanwhile, has been delivered, this time to the headquarters of Eurojust, the EU agency co-ordinating the fight against crime. (European Commission President Romano Prodi escaped unhurt when the first such device exploded at his home in the Italian city of Bologna on Sunday; European Central Bank head Jean-Claude Trichet and Europol were the targets on Monday.)

I agree with JamesMorrison's analysis. The European Union has so far achieved truly remarkable success. Moreover, its evident strategy of slow progress on difficult issues and a degree of voluntary options for members on some issues has worked to create the conditions for continued progress in the face of initial disagreement.

I do believe the current disagreement over voting proportions in the EC is likely to be a symptom of continuing disagreement between new members and those of the Franco-German 'core' over political control and some EU policies. The differences in political and economic development between new members and old will be a cause of continued friction, which may add to the intensity of the dialogue over voting proportions. It also remains to be seen how wisely France and Germany will deal with the inevitable dilution of their control of EU institutions as membership increases.

I wish them well. The process and unfolding of events will be most interesting.

Just a thought: I wonder if the Arab nations will some day create heir own union?

At the beggining, the EU was to avoid the wars between european countries.
There have never been wars between Arab nations.

Not really :wink:, just as a side effect:


(quoted from: britannica)

Ning, It seems to me that any "union" would be considered in terms of political and economic rather than conflict, although that may be one of the issues addressed.

c.i.,

Yes the Arabs have a number of organizations such as The Arab League http://faculty.winthrop.edu/haynese/mlas/al1.html

The OIC (Organization of the Islamic Conference), the former's charter dates back to 1945.

But I don't know of any analogous to the EU. But I am not an expert in this; perhaps others out there can enlighten us further. I believe the EU is an outgrowth of the European Common Market, essentially based on economic considerations, a good place to start--certainly better than those alliances based on Realpolitik type designs.

This is a valid question. Has the Arab world developed a union such as the European Common Market or has the perceived concept of these entities as "Tribes with Flags" prevented such unity? We do have the OPEC thing but that seems flimsy for a number of reasons. Conceptually it is just a unionization of Robber Barons to benefit themselves and not their citizens but current events (among other factors) may have taken the wind out of OPEC's sails.

JM

I remember that in highschool (lycée), I studied a text by Shuman were he said that one of the goals of the Union was to avoid another war in Europe (I don't find that article with google at the moment. Anyway it was in french). IMO it's more than only a side effect.
(you build tanks with steel and make them work with coal )

That certainly is true - and, btw, I remember having read something similar. when I visited Jean Monnet's home :wink:

BTW today, Ireland begins its presidency of the European Union.

Official website : www.eu2004.ie

Right, and Lille and Genoa became Europe's Cultural Capitals for 2004.