PSIR 206 Political History of Europe II Slides

PSIR 206 Political History of Europe II Slides 5 1

JOHN MCCORMICK CHAPTER 3: The Evolution of the EU pp. 57 -68 2

� Mc. Cormick notes that by the time the EEC was renamed the European Community (EC) in 1986, it had already advanced a long way in terms of scope and depth, being transformed also into a body with global & not just European significance. Together with its own administration, (including direct representation for citizens through parliament), it now had 12 members, a population of over 300 million & 20+ % of all world trade. � By 1986 the customs union was functioning well on the level of common tarrifs, but non-tarrif barriers to a common market such as subsidies & different technical standards & qualifications and different levels of indirect taxation were still present, 3

�A true common market was still seen as dependent on a common currency though the challenge this posed to national sovereignty was a major obstacle. � Following the failure of earlier attempts to work towards monetary union, a new effort began in 1979 under the name of the European Monetary System (EMS) & founded on an Exchange Rate Mechanism that utilized a «basket» European Currency Unit (known as the ECU). � The aim was to use the ECU for accounting and debt settling within the EU & psychologically encourage the move towards a single currency. Though Britain & Italy pulled out during a period of turbulence, progress was being clearly made by mid 1990’s & real currency union finally achieved in 1999 with adoption of the Euro by most, though not all EU states. 4

5

� A major breakthrough for European integration came with the Luxembourg Summit of Feb 1986 where the Single European Act (SEA), revising the previous Treaties of Rome, was signed by member states. The SEA: (1) began the drive to complete all the still missing requirements for a single market, basically removing internal passport controls, standardizing remaining subsidies & indirect taxation, & standardizing many standards (!), laws, qualifications that prevented the building of «an area without internal frontiers in which the free movement of goods, persons, services and capital is assured. » � (2) national monopolies in once «sacred» nation-state preserves such as electricity and telecommunications were ended & opened to intra-EC competition. � (3) EC Institutions were given powers in new areas such as the environment, R & D, & regional policy � (4) Increased the powers & capacity of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) � (5) Promoted achieving greater equality between the richer & poorer parts of the EC, i. e. «cohesion» � 6

Maastricht & Beyond 7

Post-WWII W. European states had focused principally on developing economic integration (albeit with political motives also), first with the ECSC & later the establishment & gradual development of the scope of the EEC. � Even such steps were unprecedented & at times faced stiff resistance from states that felt the growing challenge to their independence & sovereignty � Still greater resistance was met when the issue of political integration & union was raised. � Early efforts to move radically in this direction such as the plan to form a European Political Community tabled in 1952, (that would have led to a directly elected Europe-wide assembly & executive with supranational powers), had not been able to gather sufficient support beyond that of the more enthusiastic Europeanists & federalists who were still in a clear minority. � 8

� A weaker form of association on political affairs was eventually reached in 1970 with the agreement on European Political Cooperation (EPC). This was an informal mechanism for corrdination of member-states foreign policies that was eventually formally recognized and instituted within the SEA of 1986. � EPC was based on regular meetings of foreign ministers to try and find common ground, but ultimately cooperation was voluntary and not binding. � While the EPC had some limited success, foreign policy divisions between states were often glaring & perceived by some as threatening the very vitality of the whole Europeanist integration project. � The reaction to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan (1979) & Iraqi invasion of Kuwait (1990); & to the early stages of the crisis surrounding the break-up of Yugoslavia at the beginning of the 1990’s made the member states appear weak, divided & incapable of playing a united global role. 9

� In Feb 1992 a breakthrough Treaty on European Union (TEU), was finally signed by EC member states, albeit after certain setbacks & followed by still further crises until its final entry into force on 1 Nov 1993. The TEU is more commonly referred to as the «Maastricht Treaty» after the name of the Dutch city in which it was drafted & signed. � In Denmark & Britain the Treaty was only ratified after these two states were given special exemptions (eg. Social Chapter in Britain), & in Denmark only after a 2 nd referendum. Even in France, whose president of the 1980’s, François Miterand, had championed further political integration, the referendum was only passed by a very slim majority (51%). Britain blocked draft efforts to include explicit wording signifying the objective of establishing a federation. 10

As summarized by official EU sources: � «The Treaty on European Union (TEU) represents a new stage in European integration since it opens the way to political integration. » � «It creates a European Union consisting of three pillars: the European Communities, Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), and police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters (JHA). » � «The Treaty introduces the concept of European citizenship, reinforces the powers of the European Parliament and launches economic and monetary union (EMU). » * * See http: //europa. eu/legislation_summaries/institutional_affairs/treaties_maastricht_en. htm 11

As noted by Mc. Cormick: � The establishment of the structure of the 3 «pillars» had little substantial meaning. The 1 st, however, represented the pre-existing coal & steel, atomic & economic communities; the 2 nd represented the now formalized intergovernmental cooperation of the CFSP (though in the final analysis unanimity was required, supranationalism again rejeceted) & 3 rd represented again formalized intergovernmental cooperation on matters of crime, law & order. Together the 3 came under the new name of the European Union. � The powers of the European Parliament were enhanced; a timetable was agreed for intro. of the EURO by 1999 & new rights were given to European «citizens» such as the right to vote in local and European elections (though not national) wherever in the EU they chose to live. The EU was also given further new responsibilities in areas such as education and public health. 12

�By the time the Maastricht Treaty came into force the Cold War was over, the «iron curtain» had come down and the Soviet Union collapsed. The prospect of integrating states formerly unthinkable due to Cold War conditions was now a reality. �Based on the argument that the cohesion of the EU would be threatened if potential member states could not prove capable of abiding by certain key principles and norms, a formal set of criteria to qualify for membership eligibility was established by the June 1993 Copehagen European Council meeting. 13

� According to these «Copenhagen Criteria» : «Membership requires that candidate country has achieved stability of institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights, respect for and protection of minorities, the existence of a functioning market economy as well as the capacity to cope with competitive pressure and market forces within the Union. Membership presupposes the candidate's ability to take on the obligations of membership including adherence to the aims of political, economic and monetary union. » 14

� The incorporation of the 3 EFTA states of Austria, Sweden & Finland in 1995 was relatively simple. � Their neutrality was no longer of such sensitivity as it had previously been, their liberal democratic political culture and instutions were well-established, and economically their advanced economies would be net contributors to the EU. � Norway & Switzerland which had also contemplated membership failed to get sufficient public support in respective referenda that were held). 15

� The still bigger, & historically more significant wave of enlargement, expanding the no. of EU members from 15 -25 came on 1 st May 2004. Key Features: - EU shifts east - Less wealthy economies - 8 former socialist countries (7 from the Warsaw Pact, 1 former Yugoslavia, 2 southern islands - Cyprus problematic case - 2007 Bulgaria & Romania, 2013 Croatia also joined - EU = 28 *http: //www. economist. com/node/2628203 16

Following the successful moves to enlarge the EU eastwards, another major step forward was proposed in the form of the adoption of a Europe-wide constitution. In fact, work on drafting such a constitution had begun several years earlier under the leadership of former French president Valéry Giscard d'Estaing who led a «European Convention» where national MP’s & MEP’s as well as national government and Commission members were represented. � Strong differences emerged about how qualified-majority voting would be reflected in the treaty (this meaning essentially that without the need for unanimity states would be losing their veto on more and more issues). However, compromise was finally achieved & on 29 Oct 2004 the «Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe» (TCE) was signed by the leaders of the member states. The TCE was also supported by an overwhelming majority in the European Parliament � 17

� Once again, (as with Maastricht), the greatest difficulties surrounded the ratification process and this time the ratification process did not ultimately succeed. Though 18 member states did eventually complete the ratification process successfully 55% of voters rejected it in a referendum in France in May 2005 & 61% in a referedum in the Netherlands the following month. Following this 2 nd rejection efforts to bring the TCE into force were abandoned (Britain too was also scheduled to hold a referendum which would have been very unlikely to have brought a positive result). � Many of the constitutional provisions forseen by the TCE were ultimately brought into effect through other means such, especially, as through the signing of the Treaty of Lisbon (13 Dec 2007) (a. k. a. «the Reform Treaty» ), however, the collapse of this constitutional initiative was a clear blow reflecting the still difficult path for Europeanists in overcomming national resistance. 18

While political leaders (& politicians & bureaucrats in Strasbourg & Brussles), symbolized here by the Chair of the European Convention, Valéry Giscard d'Estaing have been more able to reach agreement on taking the European project as envisaged by Monet & Schuman «forward» , it has notably often been common voters, here symbolized by a French «commoner» who have held them back. http: //www. caef. org. uk/d 98 front. html 19