European Integration Notes PDF

***Lecture 1*** ***What is Europe ?*** ***Goodnotes*** ***Seminar 1*** ***Europe and European Union -- stylizations and impersonations. Concept of Europe of two lungs (JP II), Europe as a cradle of the Western Civilization*** Europe and the European Union: Stylizations and Impersonations In di...

***Lecture 1*** ***What is Europe ?*** ***Goodnotes*** ***Seminar 1*** ***Europe and European Union -- stylizations and impersonations. Concept of Europe of two lungs (JP II), Europe as a cradle of the Western Civilization*** Europe and the European Union: Stylizations and Impersonations In discussions, Europe is often represented or \"stylized\" in different ways to capture its unique qualities. These representations help people understand what Europe is and what it stands for. For instance: 1\. Cultural Europe -- Europe as a place with shared history, art, literature, and values. This view emphasizes Europe's ancient history, its philosophy from Greece, Roman law, and later Renaissance and Enlightenment periods. 2\. Political Europe (the European Union) -- Europe here is represented as a unified political entity through the European Union. The EU was created to maintain peace, promote economic cooperation, and uphold common values like democracy and human rights among European nations. 3\. Impersonations of Europe -- Sometimes, Europe is personified (given human characteristics) in speeches or writings. For instance, Europe might be described as a \"mother\" or \"guardian\" of Western values. This brings Europe to life and makes it easier to connect with on an emotional level. Concept of \"Europe of Two Lungs\" by Pope John Paul II Pope John Paul II described Europe as a \"Europe of two lungs,\" suggesting that Europe has two main cultural and spiritual roots: Western Europe and Eastern Europe. His metaphor means that both parts are essential for Europe to \"breathe\" fully and to be whole. \- Western Europe -- Traditionally includes countries like France, Germany, Italy, and Spain. These countries have been influenced by Catholicism, the Enlightenment, and ideas about democracy and individual rights. \- Eastern Europe -- Includes countries like Poland, Hungary, and Ukraine, which have roots in Orthodox Christianity, a strong community focus, and were shaped by different historical experiences (such as communism in the 20th century). By calling it a \"Europe of two lungs,\" John Paul II emphasized that Europe should not be divided but should embrace both Western and Eastern influences. Europe as the Cradle of Western Civilization Europe is often called the \"cradle of Western civilization\" because many ideas, values, and innovations that shaped the modern world originated there. For example: 1\. Ancient Greece and Rome -- The foundations of philosophy, democracy, law, and art were established in ancient Greece and Rome. These civilizations greatly influenced European culture and thought. 2\. Christianity -- Christianity spread from Europe and became a major force in shaping values, morality, and culture in Western civilization. 3\. Renaissance and Enlightenment -- During the Renaissance (14th-17th century) and the Enlightenment (17th-18th century), Europe experienced great developments in art, science, and philosophy, which spread globally. 4\. Industrial Revolution -- Starting in Europe, this revolutionized technology, industry, and society, setting the stage for the modern world. Europe's influence spread worldwide, and its ideas are still at the core of many modern values, institutions, and practices. This is why Europe is often seen as the birthplace, or "cradle," of Western civilization. ***Lecture 2*** ***Definitions of Integration*** ***Goodnotes*** ***Seminar 2*** ***Europe's borders: capitalist center and peripheries (Scandinavia, Balkans, Eastern Europe)*** When we talk about Europe's borders and the idea of a \"capitalist center\" and \"peripheries,\" we\'re discussing how different parts of Europe have different roles and levels of economic development. Let's break this down: Capitalist Center of Europe The capitalist center refers to the wealthiest and most economically developed countries in Europe. These countries have strong economies, high standards of living, and are generally influential in the European Union and other international organizations. Examples include: \- Germany -- Europe's largest economy, with strong industries in cars, engineering, and technology. \- France -- Known for its advanced industries and culture, with a large economy and political influence. \- United Kingdom -- Although it left the EU, the UK still has a powerful economy and is important to European trade and finance. \- Benelux Countries (Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg) -- Small but wealthy, with strong banking and trade industries. These countries are at the "center" because they often lead European policy, have high levels of trade, and attract investment. They form the core of what people often think of as "Western Europe." Peripheries of Europe The peripheries are regions that are generally less wealthy, have different economic structures, and sometimes face more challenges in catching up to the capitalist center. Let's look at a few specific regions: 1\. Scandinavia (Nordic countries: Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Finland, Iceland) \- These countries have high standards of living and are often well-developed, but they are sometimes considered "peripheral" due to their northern location and smaller populations. \- They have mixed economies with strong social welfare systems, blending capitalism with extensive social services. \- Despite being outside the economic \"center,\" Scandinavia is very stable, with high quality of life, education, and healthcare. 2\. The Balkans (Countries like Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Albania, North Macedonia) \- The Balkans are in Southeast Europe and are often considered peripheral because they are still developing economically and face challenges from recent histories of conflict. \- Some of these countries are not in the EU, and those that are (like Bulgaria and Croatia) are among the EU\'s less economically developed members. \- The Balkans also have closer ties historically to both Western Europe and Eastern influences, making them unique but sometimes economically vulnerable. 3\. Eastern Europe (Countries like Poland, Hungary, Romania, and Ukraine) \- Many Eastern European countries were part of the Soviet Union or its sphere of influence, which impacted their economies and political systems. \- Since the end of communism, these countries have made economic progress and some (like Poland and the Czech Republic) are now quite successful. \- However, they are still catching up to the capitalist center, facing issues like income inequality, reliance on manufacturing, and in some cases, political challenges. Capitalist Center and Peripheries: Economic Relations In a capitalist system, the center often benefits from the labor, resources, and markets in the peripheries. For example: \- Trade and Investment -- Central countries may invest in businesses or factories in peripheral countries, where labor is cheaper, boosting their own economies. \- Migration -- Workers from peripheral areas might move to central countries for better job opportunities, while remittances (money sent back home) can help their home countries. \- Policy Influence\* -- Central countries in the EU often shape economic policies that affect the whole region, sometimes benefiting themselves more than peripheral countries. Overall, this concept of center and peripheries in Europe shows the economic differences within the continent and how various regions interact in a capitalist system. While some countries are very wealthy and influential, others are still developing or have smaller economies, creating a diverse but interconnected Europe. ***Study Questions 1&2*** 1. **Discuss possible relations between Europe and EU.** 1\. Geographical Context Europe as a geographical entity is a continent comprising over 40 countries, stretching from the Atlantic Ocean to the Ural Mountains in Russia. The EU is a subset of Europe, currently consisting of 27 member states. Some European countries, such as Norway, Switzerland, and Ukraine, are not part of the EU, while others (e.g., Turkey) straddle Europe and Asia. The relationship between Europe and the EU is partly defined by how the EU shapes Europe\'s identity and role in global affairs, but not all of Europe's diversity and dynamics are represented within the EU framework. 2\. Political Relations The EU has become the leading political force in Europe, influencing governance, democracy, and the rule of law across the continent. EU policies and standards often set benchmarks for European nations outside the bloc. Non-EU European countries often align with EU policies to gain access to its market or to cooperate on security and environmental issues. For instance: Norway and Switzerland, though not EU members, are part of the European Economic Area (EEA) or have bilateral agreements with the EU. EU Enlargement Policy ties the broader Europe to the EU by offering membership prospects to countries like the Western Balkans, contingent on meeting EU standards. 3\. Economic Relations The EU dominates Europe\'s economy through its single market, which facilitates the free movement of goods, services, capital, and people among member states. Non-EU European nations maintain close economic ties with the EU. For example: The United Kingdom (UK), after Brexit, maintains trade relations through agreements like the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement. Countries like Turkey have a Customs Union with the EU, integrating their economies with the bloc's trade policies. The euro, the EU's common currency, extends its influence beyond the EU, affecting financial stability and trade across Europe. 4\. Cultural and Social Relations The EU often serves as a cultural unifier within Europe, promoting shared values such as democracy, human rights, and multiculturalism. Initiatives like the Erasmus program foster cross-cultural exchanges among Europeans, both from EU and some non-EU countries. However, Europe's broader cultural diversity extends beyond the EU, including countries with distinct historical and cultural ties to the continent but not to the EU (e.g., Russia, Turkey). 5\. Challenges in Europe-EU Relations Geopolitical Divides: Not all European nations see the EU as the defining institution for Europe. Russia, for instance, opposes EU expansion in its sphere of influence, leading to tensions (e.g., over Ukraine and Georgia). Integration vs. Sovereignty: Some European countries resist joining the EU or adopting its policies to maintain greater national sovereignty. The Role of NATO: Security in Europe is not solely dependent on the EU but also on NATO, which includes several non-EU members such as the US, Canada, and Turkey. 6\. Potential Future Relations Deeper Integration: The EU could expand its membership to include more European countries, strengthening its claim as a representative of Europe. Flexible Arrangements: Europe and the EU might develop more differentiated relationships, where non-EU countries participate in EU programs without full membership (e.g., Switzerland-like models). A Divided Europe: Geopolitical tensions, such as those with Russia, could lead to further divisions between the EU-aligned parts of Europe and others. Conclusion The EU plays a pivotal role in shaping Europe's political, economic, and cultural landscape, but it does not represent the entirety of the continent. The relationship between Europe and the EU is marked by collaboration, alignment, and occasional divergence. Moving forward, this relationship will likely continue to evolve, influenced by enlargement, external challenges, and the EU's ability to act as a unifying force in a diverse and dynamic continent. 2. **Analyse the differences and consequences of adopting essentialist and relativist concepts of Europe.** The adoption of essentialist and relativist concepts of Europe reflects contrasting approaches to defining Europe's identity, culture, and boundaries, with significant differences and far-reaching consequences for politics, society, and international relations. Below is an analysis of these concepts and their implications. Essentialist Concept of Europe The essentialist view defines Europe in terms of fixed, intrinsic characteristics such as shared heritage, geography, or values. This approach emphasizes: \- Historical and Cultural Roots: Europe is often seen as grounded in Greco-Roman civilization, Christianity, the Renaissance, and Enlightenment values such as human rights and democracy. \- Geographical Boundaries: Essentialists tend to stress clear-cut geographical boundaries (e.g., Europe as defined by the Ural Mountains or excluding countries with primarily non-European identities). \- Homogeneity: Essentialism leans toward seeing Europe as culturally and ideologically unified, which may exclude diversity within Europe itself or cultures seen as external. Consequences of the Essentialist Concept 1\. Inclusion and Exclusion: \- Some countries, like Turkey or Russia, may be seen as "non-European" despite their partial geographical or historical ties to the continent. \- This can create tensions over membership in European institutions like the EU, as debates over "European identity" become barriers. 2\. Geopolitical Relations: \- Essentialism may reinforce an "us vs. them" mindset, particularly in relations with neighboring regions such as the Middle East or Asia. \- It can limit the scope for cultural or political cooperation with nations deemed "outside" Europe's essence. 3\. Cultural Conservatism: \- The essentialist view often leads to efforts to preserve a perceived European core identity, which can marginalize immigrant communities or multicultural dynamics. \- This may fuel nationalist or populist movements that resist globalization or integration. Relativist Concept of Europe The relativist perspective sees Europe as a flexible, evolving construct shaped by historical, social, and cultural diversity. It emphasizes: \- Fluid Boundaries: Europe is defined not by fixed geography but by changing political, economic, and cultural dynamics. \- Diverse Identities: Europe is seen as a mosaic of traditions, languages, and values, accommodating differences rather than imposing a singular identity. \- Inclusivity and Interaction: Relativists recognize Europe as part of a larger interconnected world, shaped by exchanges with other regions over time. Consequences of the Relativist Concept 1\. Inclusivity: \- Relativism allows for broader participation in European identity, welcoming nations with diverse cultural or historical ties (e.g., Turkey, Ukraine, or even countries with Mediterranean or transcontinental links). \- This fosters greater collaboration and integration within institutions like the EU. 2\. Dynamic Policy Approaches: \- Policies are less rigid and more adaptable to changing global realities, such as migration, globalization, and climate change. \- It encourages open borders and multicultural policies that promote diversity and innovation. 3\. Challenges to Cohesion: \- Relativism risks diluting a cohesive European identity, leading to tensions over integration and shared values. \- The lack of a clear definition may weaken solidarity within European institutions, particularly when faced with crises requiring unity. Conclusion: Adopting an essentialist concept fosters clarity and cohesion but risks exclusion and rigidity, while a relativist approach promotes inclusivity and adaptability but can undermine a sense of unity. The consequences of these perspectives affect not only internal European dynamics---such as EU enlargement and multiculturalism---but also Europe\'s global role. Balancing these approaches may offer the best path forward, combining a respect for shared values with openness to diversity and evolution. 3. **Compare various ways to define integration.** 1\. Ernst Haas (Neofunctionalism) Definition: Integration is the process by which nations relinquish the desire and ability to independently conduct foreign and domestic policies, opting instead for joint decision-making or delegating decisions to central institutions. Focus: The surrender of national sovereignty and the creation of joint or supranational decision-making mechanisms. Key Features: Emphasizes a fundamental shift in sovereignty. Prioritizes the creation of central organs for collective decision-making. Implications: Suggests that integration is about eroding independence in favor of interdependence, reflecting a structural transformation of governance. 2\. Leon Lindberg (1970) Definition: Political integration involves nations participating in regularized, ongoing decision-making through collective institutions, making binding public decisions collectively rather than autonomously. Focus: The regularity and institutionalization of collective decision-making processes. Key Features: Stresses the procedural and institutional aspects of integration. Binding decisions made by collective mechanisms. Implications: Highlights the importance of institutionalization and ongoing participation, portraying integration as a functional and procedural phenomenon. 3\. Castaldi (2000) Definition: Integration is the establishment of supranational institutions and overcoming unanimity as the method of decision-making. Focus: The shift from unanimity to majority-based decision-making and the role of supranational institutions. Key Features: Addresses decision-making efficiency and institutional hierarchy. Recognizes the role of majority voting as key to deeper integration. Implications: Suggests that the depth of integration is measured by the extent of supranational authority and the ability to transcend veto-based systems. 4\. Karl Deutsch (1957) Definition: Integration is the attainment of a sense of community and strong institutions/practices that ensure peaceful change among populations within a territory. Focus: The socio-political aspect of integration, particularly the sense of shared identity and community. Key Features: Highlights peace and stability as outcomes of integration. Emphasizes cultural and psychological unity alongside institutional development. Implications: Views integration as rooted in creating a shared sense of identity and trust, essential for long-term stability and cooperation. 5\. Simon Hix (2001) Definition: Regional integration is a multifaceted process where sovereign states establish common political, legal, economic, and social institutions for collective governance. Focus: The multi-dimensional and governance-focused nature of integration. Key Features: Addresses multiple facets of integration (political, economic, social). Sees integration as encompassing collective governance across various domains. Implications: Broadens the concept to include various spheres of governance, emphasizing both formal institutions and practical cooperation.  Implications of Differences 1. Depth vs. Breadth: - Haas and Castaldi focus on deep political integration and shifts in sovereignty, while Hix takes a broader view, considering integration across multiple domains. - Deutsch's emphasis on community reflects the importance of social cohesion for successful integration. 2. Institutionalization vs. Identity: - Lindberg, Castaldi, and Hix highlight institutional mechanisms, while Deutsch's focus on the \"sense of community\" adds a psychological and cultural dimension. 3. Decision-Making Dynamics: - Castaldi's emphasis on majority-based decision-making aligns with the EU's evolution from unanimity to Qualified Majority Voting (QMV). Haas and Lindberg highlight the broader delegation of power to central bodies. 4. Practical vs. Ideational: - Haas and Lindberg take a functional and practical view of integration. Deutsch and Hix add normative aspects like community-building and governance diversity. Conclusion: These definitions collectively illustrate the multifaceted nature of integration, encompassing sovereignty, institutionalization, decision-making, community-building, and governance. While Haas and Castaldi prioritize structural shifts toward supranational authority, Deutsch and Hix emphasize cultural unity and governance diversity. A comprehensive understanding of integration requires balancing these perspectives to address both institutional efficiency and socio-political cohesion. ***Lecture 3*** ***History of European Integration*** History of the idea of European unity after the Westphalia Treaties Principles of Westphalian Order: 1\. Sovereignty and forma\\ legal equity of the states 2\. No Universal power\\ pretence to the universal power(there were two seeds of universal power before, the Pope and Holy Roman Emperor) 3\. Right to engage in war privilege of the monarch 4\. Gradual forming of nation states There were few motives for international cooperation 1\. To avoid conflict(search for a new method to set the conflict) 2\. To express Christian unity(there was still a feeling that Christians have a moral obligation to engage in international relations with other Christians that are based on certain values ) 3\. To promote progress(working together to achieve progress was very honourable) Thinkers introduced few thoughts 1\. European Senate 2\. European League 3\. European Court of Arbitration few problems with those thoughts: Should we include Turkey (a non-Christian but European state)? Should the Senate reflect the power of the states(with the number of representatives) or reflect the equality(legal)? Should it be based on law or politics? In the XX century the situation changed because of Industrialization, nation-states(they were able to control territory and population, borders and use the human potential to create huge armies), etc The most prominent problem was to civilise war(to introduce some measures) Because of that → 2 Hague conferences concerning humanitarian law and the law of war After 1 WW, the League of Nations was created, however, it was not the European community → League was only for the winners, not losers(for the first time in history only the winners decided the fate and order of the world) The idea of European integration came from two politicians: Aristde Brians and Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi Beginnings of European INtegration after 2 WW Preventing the next war is a crucial aspect State of Play(on what grounds they wanted to create cooperation) 1\. Impossibility to maintain German participation and Demilitarization 2\. Threat from the Soviet Union 3\. Common Christian background of the leaders who had lived through both WW 4\. The strong belief that Europe will not survive Third WW(the first two WW transformed Europe from the Mistress of the World to a puppet in the hands of the US and USSR) So, some new measures should be introduced to ensure that Europe has a future There were to alternatives : 1 Traditional intergovernmental(Supported by UK) Setting new intergovernmental organisation(Council of Europe) Respecting the traditional position of sovereignty It was the same old song, The league of Nations was the same and it had not any power to limit states, it failed 2 New supranational(Supported by France(before de Gaule)) ECSC(as an example) These new structures respected sovereignty but were introducing new ways to execute it(by sharing it and trying to act together) Both propositions had one main goal- peace avoiding future conflict making secret agreements impossible the economy was not crucial Economy and prosperity were Plan B, and Plan A was preventing the war Integration was a novel approach to the German problem ***Seminar 3*** ***History of European Integration II -- 1970-1993*** **Stage Three: 1970--1991** \- Initial Enlargements and Policy Developments: The UK, Ireland, and Denmark joined the EEC on 1 January 1973, following the 1972 Accession Treaties. Norway also negotiated accession but rejected it in a national referendum. \- European Political Cooperation (EPC): Established in 1970, the EPC aimed to coordinate member states\' foreign policies. Although informal and outside the EEC framework, it laid the groundwork for the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). \- Institutional Enhancements: The European Council, comprising heads of state or government, was formalized in 1974 to guide major policy decisions. The first direct elections for the European Parliament were held in 1979, transforming it from an advisory assembly to a democratically elected body with growing influence. \- Monetary Integration Steps: The introduction of the European Monetary System (EMS) in 1979 and the earlier 'currency snake' (1972) helped stabilize exchange rates. The European Currency Unit (ECU) was created as a precursor to a unified currency. \- Single European Act (1986): The Single European Act (SEA) was signed to amend the Treaty of Rome, enhancing the decision-making process and setting a 1992 target for completing the single market. It also expanded the scope of the EEC to include social policy, environment, and research. \- Schengen Agreement (1985): Signed initially by France, Germany, and the Benelux countries, the Schengen Agreement abolished border controls between signatory states, facilitating the free movement of people. \- New Members: Greece joined the EEC in 1981, followed by Spain and Portugal in 1986, marking a southern expansion and integrating more diverse economies and political landscapes. \- Post-Cold War Shifts: The collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of communist regimes in Eastern Europe in 1989--1991 opened the door for these nations to seek closer ties with Western Europe. The EEC began forging association agreements with post-communist states, signaling future expansion. **Stage Four: 1992--2004** \- Maastricht Treaty (1992): The Treaty on European Union, signed in Maastricht, introduced a three-pillar structure: \- \*First Pillar\*: Economic integration under the European Community, emphasizing policies like the Single Market and the planned Economic and Monetary Union (EMU). \- \*Second Pillar\*: The Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), aiming for joint positions and actions on international issues. \- \*Third Pillar\*: Cooperation in justice and home affairs, covering asylum, immigration, and police collaboration. \- Economic Milestones: The euro was launched in non-cash form in 1999, becoming legal tender for electronic transactions. It was introduced as physical currency on 1 January 2002, replacing national currencies in 12 member states. \- Treaty of Amsterdam (1997): Addressed institutional shortcomings and expanded the scope of justice, freedom, and security policies. It incorporated the Schengen Agreement into EU law and emphasized human rights and employment policies. \- Treaty of Nice (2001): Focused on preparing the EU for enlargement, reforming voting procedures, and addressing representation in EU institutions. It sought to streamline decision-making to accommodate new members. \- Eastern Enlargement: The 1990s and early 2000s saw intensive negotiations for expanding the EU to include Central and Eastern European countries. The Copenhagen Criteria (1993) set the standards for accession, emphasizing democratic governance, a market economy, and the adoption of EU legislation. Ten countries joined the EU on 1 May 2004, marking the largest single expansion in its history. ***Lecture 4*** ***History of European Integration 2*** 1. Single European Act, Delors and politics Delor's Plan -- 1. Creating single market without internal barriers will benefit the economies. 2. Actors on the market will see how high and illogical cost of currency exchange are. 3. They will support the Commission in pushing for monetary policy. 4. It will be really easy to present free movement of capital as the first step in building monetary union. **Common currency is economically not necessary but is important political symbol and must be emitted.** Single market was implemented in 1992 with last limit on the freedom of movement of capital removed 1 January 1994. - Really hard to create - About 300 new regulations must be agreed in 5 years - New kind of horizontal directive should be introduces - Liberal push for market effectiveness - Many critics said it is not possible, nearly impossible to achieve(they were wrong) End of Cold War and establishment European Union Delor was planning a new conference about the monetary union for 1990 Falling down of the Iron Curtain surprised everybody- nobody was ready for German reunification and Eastern Europe reconstruction. Nobody was able to predict it There was a huge problem. What to do? There was an alternative, we should follow the earlier prepared path, deepen integration, introduce the single currency and then think about widening. The most pressing issue was Eastern Germany. Unified Germany was much stronger. Stronger Germany needs stronger bonds. Monetary Union was the price for German Unification. Road to Maastricht - 2 conference - 1 for the monetary union was prepared in advance - Clearly defined scope - 2 conference was proposed by Germany.(Political union). - Germany thought it was the chance to advance the integration not only in economic terms but in politics also. It was not considered earlier. It was made by scratch. What to put inside its proposition? Foreign Policy was proposed, but it needs a huge new framework 2. Union semper reformata Amsterdam reform of 1997 - Strengthening the power of the European Parliament, establishing 700 maximum sizes. - Establishing Area of Freedom, Security, Justice - Reform of the Third pillar- Police and Judicial Cooperation in Criminal Matters - Including Schengen acquis into EU Law - Minor changes in CFDP; establishing a high representative office - Strengthening EU social policy Nice reform of - Introducing European Security and Defense Policy - Strengthening the European Parliament to 732 seats - Making regulations concerning enhanced cooperation standards in all three pillars, - Officially preparing for Union enlargement 3. Constitution and we, the people New method of treaty reform - Convention- meeting with head of states, EU institutions and civil society - Plan to replace old, complicated and messy treaties with a new one - Constituting EU- the distinction between constitutional norms and other provisions. Constitution for Europe - Symbolic layer- president, names of legal acts, ministers - Organizational layer= one structure replacing the pillars - Decision making layer- news way of voting in the Council - Bringing EU closer to the people The Death of the Constitution(France and Netherlands refused) Voting was not againt EU but against their national leaders Something to remember - Constant reforms since 1992 - Deepening first, widening later - the common currency is a political affair - Failure of constitutional Treaty made treaty reforms almost 'taboo' ***Seminar 4*** ***Smaller Europe -- Benelux, Nordic Council, CEFTA*** *1. Benelux* History: \- Founded in 1944 as a customs union during WWII (signed in London), with Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg agreeing to remove customs duties (taxes on imports) between them. \- Officially formed as the Benelux Union in 1948. This was a time when Europe was still recovering from the war, and economic cooperation was seen as essential for rebuilding. \- The Benelux Treaty of 1958 formalized further integration, allowing free movement of goods, people, services, and capital, which would later influence the European Economic Community (EEC) and the European Union. Achievements: \- Economic Integration: Benelux removed tariffs and created a single market for their goods, which was groundbreaking and set the stage for European integration. \- Influence on the EU: Benelux was a model for the European Union's single market. The three countries were among the founding members of the EEC in 1957. \- Continued Cooperation: Even within the EU, Benelux countries collaborate on transportation, justice, climate, and digital innovation, with ongoing joint projects in energy and environmental standards. Why It Should Exist: \- Regional Influence: By cooperating, these smaller countries increase their influence within the EU, allowing them to shape policies more effectively. \- Shared Values and Efficiency: The Benelux countries have similar economic and social values, which allows them to act more swiftly on regional issues without needing approval from the larger EU. \- Economic Resilience: Together, they create a resilient, interconnected economy that benefits from shared investments and infrastructure. *2. Nordic Council* History: \- The Nordic Council was established in 1952 by Denmark, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden, with Finland joining in 1955. The council was founded as a way to foster cooperation among the Nordic countries, who share cultural ties, languages, and values. \- The Council of Ministers was added in 1971 to strengthen government collaboration on policies like education, the environment, and healthcare. \- While some members later joined the EU (like Denmark, Sweden, and Finland), others (Norway and Iceland) chose to remain outside, making the Council an important forum for all five. Achievements: \- Passport-Free Travel: Decades before the EU's Schengen Agreement, Nordic citizens could move freely between Nordic countries without passports. \- Nordic Model: The Council supported social policies that became known as the "Nordic Model," balancing a strong welfare state with a market economy. This model is admired globally for its success in healthcare, education, and equality. \- Environmental Leadership: The Council has promoted green policies and sustainable development, and it regularly coordinates on climate action and energy solutions, often setting a global example. Why It Should Exist: \- Cultural and Social Bond: The Nordic countries have a deep cultural connection and similar social policies, making cooperation natural and efficient. \- Regional Stability and Identity: By working together, they preserve their unique social and economic models, which may not align with all EU policies. \- Global Influence on Climate and Welfare: The Nordic Council sets high standards on sustainability and social welfare that inspire other regions and countries worldwide. *3. CEFTA (Central European Free Trade Agreement)* History: - Establishment: CEFTA was founded in 1992 by Poland, Hungary, and Czechoslovakia to promote regional trade and prepare its members for EU accession. Slovenia joined in 1996, Romania and Bulgaria in 1997, and Croatia in 2003. - Post-EU Transition: As the founding members and others joined the European Union in the 2000s, they left CEFTA. To maintain a regional free trade framework, the agreement was reinvigorated in 2006 for non-EU countries in Southeast Europe. - Modern Membership: Current members include Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Moldova, Montenegro, North Macedonia, and Serbia. These countries are on the path to eventual EU membership. Achievements: - Trade Liberalization: CEFTA has significantly reduced tariffs and trade barriers among its members, boosting intra-regional trade and economic cooperation. - EU Accession Preparation: The agreement has served as a stepping stone for members to adopt EU-compatible trade policies and standards, easing their integration into the EU market. - Investment and Economic Integration: CEFTA promotes foreign investment by creating a larger, more attractive regional market with harmonized regulations. - Dispute Resolution Mechanisms: CEFTA introduced systems to manage trade disputes among members, ensuring fair practices and fostering trust. Why It Should Exist: - Economic Development: CEFTA supports regional economic growth by encouraging trade, investment, and economic integration, essential for countries with developing economies. - EU Accession Support: The framework aligns members' policies with EU standards, helping them meet criteria for EU membership and ensuring a smoother transition. - Regional Stability: By promoting cooperation and interdependence, CEFTA fosters political and economic stability in Southeast Europe, a region historically prone to conflict. - Global Market Competitiveness: Together, CEFTA members can pool resources to compete more effectively in global markets, attracting investment and reducing economic disparities. ***Study questions 3&4*** 1. **Analyse the international conditions favorable to the integration project in 1950s and 60s.** 1\. The Geopolitical Context of the Cold War - Bipolar World Order: The division of the world into two ideological blocs, led by the United States and the Soviet Union, created a security imperative for Western European countries to align and cooperate. Integration was seen as a way to strengthen Western Europe against the communist threat. - American Support for Integration: The United States actively supported European integration as part of its strategy to counter Soviet influence. Initiatives such as the Marshall Plan provided economic aid to rebuild Europe and encouraged regional cooperation through frameworks like the Organisation for European Economic Co-operation (OEEC). - Containment of Germany: Integrating West Germany into a European framework was seen as essential to preventing future conflicts. The European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC, 1951) was a direct response to the need to control strategic industries and ensure Franco-German reconciliation. 2\. Post-War Economic Recovery - Economic Devastation: After World War II, European nations faced widespread destruction, requiring collective efforts for reconstruction. Shared economic recovery mechanisms, such as the European Economic Community (EEC, 1957), facilitated rebuilding efforts and promoted economic interdependence. - Industrial Modernization: Integration allowed countries to pool resources, modernize industries, and create economies of scale. The ECSC and EEC helped to eliminate trade barriers and harmonize policies, leading to increased productivity and economic growth. - Economic Security: By fostering interdependence, integration reduced the risk of economic rivalry, particularly between France and Germany, and created a stable economic foundation for the region. 3\. Political Will for Cooperation - Desire for Peace: The devastation of two world wars created a strong desire among European nations to prevent future conflicts. Integration was viewed as a mechanism for ensuring peace through shared sovereignty and economic interdependence. - Visionary Leadership: Leaders such as Jean Monnet, Robert Schuman, Konrad Adenauer, and Alcide De Gasperi provided the political will and vision necessary to drive the integration process. Their commitment to European unity overcame nationalist tendencies. - Decline of Colonial Empires: The loss of colonies by European powers like France and the UK reduced their global influence, encouraging them to focus on regional cooperation to maintain relevance in a changing world order. 4\. Institutional Frameworks - ECSC as a Model: The ECSC provided a blueprint for supranational governance, demonstrating that shared institutions could manage resources and resolve disputes effectively. - Treaty of Rome (1957): The establishment of the EEC and Euratom further institutionalized economic and political cooperation, laying the groundwork for the EU. These institutions created mechanisms for decision-making and coordination that reinforced integration. 5\. Ideological and Cultural Factors - Shared Democratic Values: Western European countries, united by a commitment to democracy, found common ground for cooperation. Integration was seen as a way to solidify democratic governance and counter authoritarianism. - Cultural Unity: Despite national differences, Europe's shared cultural heritage and historical ties created a sense of belonging that facilitated integration. 6\. Challenges and Opportunities in the International Arena - Exclusion of Eastern Europe: The division of Europe during the Cold War meant that integration was limited to the Western bloc. This allowed the integration project to focus on a smaller, more cohesive group of countries without the complexities of Eastern European politics. - Trade and Globalization: The emergence of global trade patterns made economic integration appealing as a way to compete with larger economies, such as the United States and the Soviet Union. Conclusion: The favorable international conditions of the 1950s and 60s---shaped by the Cold War, economic recovery needs, visionary leadership, and institutional frameworks---provided a strong foundation for European integration. Geopolitical pressures encouraged unity, while economic and cultural factors reinforced the benefits of cooperation. These conditions enabled the creation of enduring institutions like the ECSC, EEC, and Euratom, setting the stage for deeper integration in subsequent decades. 2. **Compare the Maastricht, Amsterdam and Nice versions of Treaty of the European Union** 1. Purpose and Context - Maastricht Treaty (1992): The Maastricht Treaty was pivotal as it marked the formal creation of the European Union and established the framework for deeper economic and political integration. It aimed to solidify the economic union, introduce EU citizenship, and prepare for a single currency. - Amsterdam Treaty (1997): Amsterdam sought to refine and address the shortcomings of Maastricht, focusing on improving efficiency, transparency, and democratic legitimacy. It came in response to growing demands for a more cohesive policy approach and to prepare for future challenges. - Nice Treaty (2001): The primary goal of the Treaty of Nice was to address institutional challenges in preparation for the anticipated enlargement of the EU, ensuring decision-making structures would remain effective as more member states joined. 2\. Institutional Reforms - Maastricht: Established the EU's three-pillar structure: the European Community (economic and social policies), Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), and Justice and Home Affairs (JHA). It enhanced the powers of the European Parliament by introducing the co-decision procedure. - Amsterdam: Transferred significant aspects of JHA to the First Pillar, incorporating issues like asylum and immigration under Community law, and integrated the Schengen Agreement into EU law. It further expanded the legislative role of the European Parliament. - Nice: Focused on internal institutional reforms, notably revising the voting system within the Council of the EU to balance power among member states. It set limits on the number of European Commissioners and MEPs to manage an expanded union. 3\. Legislative and Democratic Enhancements - Maastricht: Gave the European Parliament increased influence but still faced criticism for maintaining a "democratic deficit." Introduced EU citizenship, which included rights such as voting in local and European elections. - Amsterdam: Significantly strengthened the co-decision procedure, further empowering the European Parliament and enhancing the legislative process. This treaty also emphasized the principle of subsidiarity to ensure decision-making occurred at the most effective level. - Nice: While not significantly enhancing the powers of the European Parliament compared to Amsterdam, it extended the use of qualified majority voting (QMV) to additional policy areas to streamline decision-making in an enlarged EU. 4\. Policy Scope and Social Focus - Maastricht: Focused heavily on economic integration, laying the groundwork for the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) and establishing convergence criteria for the adoption of the euro. - Amsterdam: Broadened the policy focus to include social issues, formalizing cooperation on employment and social inclusion. It prioritized the EU's commitment to freedom, security, and justice. - Nice: Did not introduce significant new policy areas but was essential for accommodating upcoming enlargements. It laid groundwork for recognizing the EU's Charter of Fundamental Rights (though not legally binding at the time). 5\. Impact and Legacy - Maastricht: Established the EU's foundational structure and set the course for the euro, but faced criticism for complexity and a lack of citizen engagement. - Amsterdam: Enhanced EU functionality and democracy, integrating border management under EU law and addressing social concerns more directly. However, it left some institutional inefficiencies unresolved. - Nice: Essential for preparing the EU's institutions for expansion, enabling the accession of Eastern European countries in 2004. Nonetheless, it was seen as a "stopgap" measure, leading to calls for further constitutional reform. Conclusion: The Maastricht, Amsterdam, and Nice treaties represent stages of evolution in the EU's development. Maastricht laid the groundwork with bold, integrative steps; Amsterdam fine-tuned the EU's structure and expanded social policy focus; and Nice addressed institutional capacities to support the union's enlargement. Together, they reflect the EU's efforts to balance deeper integration with practical governance. 3. **Explain the reasons for the failure of EU constitutionalisation efforts in the first decade of XXI centaury** The early 2000s saw ambitious attempts to establish a formal constitutional framework for the European Union (EU). The primary initiative was the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, signed in 2004 but ultimately failing to be ratified. Several factors contributed to this failure, which are explored in detail below. 1\. Diverging National Interests and Sovereignty Concerns A key reason for the failure was the divergence of national interests among member states. The proposed constitution aimed to create a deeper political integration and transfer certain powers to the EU level, sparking concerns over the erosion of national sovereignty. Countries with strong national identities and traditions of independence, such as the UK and Denmark, expressed reservations about ceding more power to Brussels. These sovereignty concerns resonated with citizens who feared losing control over crucial aspects of governance. 2\. Lack of Public Support and Citizen Engagement The constitutional process highlighted a significant gap between EU institutions and European citizens. While EU leaders and policymakers supported the draft constitution as a step toward stronger unity and more efficient governance, the general public often perceived it as an elite-driven project. The complex language and broad scope of the treaty made it difficult for many citizens to understand its implications. This disconnect fueled skepticism and contributed to negative referenda outcomes, such as the French and Dutch rejections in 2005. 3\. Economic Concerns and Enlargement Fatigue The early 21st century was marked by economic challenges, including sluggish growth and unemployment in several EU countries. These economic conditions amplified public fears about the potential impact of further integration. Additionally, the 2004 enlargement, which brought ten new member states into the EU, created anxieties about how a broader union would function. This enlargement fatigue compounded resistance to constitutionalisation, as some citizens questioned whether the EU was expanding too quickly without sufficient institutional adaptation. 4\. Identity and Cultural Differences European integration has always had to navigate cultural and identity-based differences among member states. The constitutional treaty's ambition to define common values and principles was met with unease in societies that valued their unique cultural and legal traditions. For example, debates over religious references in the preamble underscored deep-seated divisions regarding the role of religion in public life. The lack of consensus on such issues weakened the sense of shared purpose necessary for constitutional adoption. 5\. Complexity and Perception of Democratic Deficit The EU has often faced criticism for its perceived democratic deficit---a situation where decision-making processes are seen as opaque and disconnected from the electorate. The constitutional treaty was no exception. Its length and complex provisions made it appear technocratic and remote, reinforcing the belief that it was an imposition by bureaucrats rather than a reflection of citizens\' will. This perception discouraged public trust and participation, further hindering ratification efforts. 6\. Referenda and Political Risks The requirement for ratification through referenda in certain member states added significant political risk. While some governments chose parliamentary votes, others held referenda, which became focal points for broader dissatisfaction with national and EU leadership. The French and Dutch referenda of 2005 demonstrated how such votes could become expressions of domestic discontent rather than evaluations of the treaty's content. The resulting rejections stalled the constitutional project and highlighted the fragility of relying on public votes for complex, integrative measures. Conclusion The failure of the EU's constitutionalisation efforts in the first decade of the 21st century was multifaceted, rooted in sovereignty concerns, inadequate public engagement, economic pressures, identity differences, perceived democratic deficits, and the risks inherent in referenda. These factors combined to create a challenging environment where consensus was difficult to achieve, ultimately leading to the abandonment of the constitutional treaty and the subsequent adoption of the Treaty of Lisbon as a more pragmatic solution. ***Lecture 5*** ***Theories of Integration*** 1. Academia. Introduction and the role of theorization Main features to explain: - Was integration process the effect of unique situation? - Is it possible to replicate and stabilize other regions? - Was the introduction of supranational bodies determined to state control of the process? -- European Commission, Court of Justice, European Parliament. - Is there a qualitative or quantitative difference between standard international cooperation and integration? - Can we predict what is the outcome of the integration process? Federal state? Confederation? New political system? Security community? Development of theoretical thinking: - How to avoid war? -- federalism, functionalism; - Why is the process developing in a certain way? - Neofunctionalism, state-centric approach, liberal intergovernmentalism. - How does the EU work \\ what can we say about new polity? - Multi-level governance, institutionalism, Social constructivism, political system analysis 2. Introducing the Mosaic of Integration Theory 3. Early theories +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+ | Theory | Definitio | Main | Main | Creators | Influence | | | n | Features | Goals | | on | | | | | | | European | | | | | | | Integrati | | | | | | | on | +===========+===========+===========+===========+===========+===========+ | Functiona | Focuses | 1. | \- Foster | David | \- | | lism | on | Gradual | peace and | Mitrany | Provided | | | solving | integrati | stability | (1943-195 | groundwor | | | practical | on | through | 0s) | k | | | problems | in | interdepe | | for | | | by | technical | ndence. | | sectoral | | | creating | or | | | integrati | | | supranati | economic | \- Build | | on, | | | onal | areas. | trust via | | influenci | | | instituti | | functiona | | ng | | | ons | 2. Avoids | l | | early | | | in | political | cooperati | | European | | | specific | and | on. | | projects | | | sectors. | ideologic | | | like the | | | | al | | | European | | | | conflict. | | | Coal and | | | | | | | Steel | | | | 3. | | | Community | | | | Promotes | | | (ECSC). | | | | the | | | | | | | creation | | | | | | | of | | | | | | | specializ | | | | | | | ed | | | | | | | instituti | | | | | | | ons | | | | | | | to | | | | | | | address | | | | | | | practical | | | | | | | problems. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 4. | | | | | | | Emphasize | | | | | | | s | | | | | | | expertise | | | | | | | and | | | | | | | technocra | | | | | | | tic | | | | | | | governanc | | | | | | | e. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 5. Belief | | | | | | | in the | | | | | | | \"spillov | | | | | | | er | | | | | | | effect\" | | | | | | | (integrat | | | | | | | ion | | | | | | | in one | | | | | | | area | | | | | | | fosters | | | | | | | cooperati | | | | | | | on | | | | | | | in | | | | | | | others). | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 6. Strong | | | | | | | focus on | | | | | | | non-polit | | | | | | | ical | | | | | | | goals | | | | | | | like | | | | | | | infrastru | | | | | | | cture, | | | | | | | health, | | | | | | | and | | | | | | | trade. | | | | +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+ | Federalis | Advocates | 1. | \- | Altiero | \- | | m | for a | Creation | Establish | Spinelli, | Inspired | | | centraliz | of a | a | Ernesto | the 1941 | | | ed | constitut | European | Rossi | Ventotene | | | federal | ion | federatio | | Manifesto | | | governmen | or legal | n | |. | | | t | framework | to | | | | | to unify | for | prevent | | \- | | | states | integrati | war and | | Federalis | | | while | on. | foster | | t | | | maintaini | | economic/ | | ideals | | | ng | 2. | political | | influence | | | some | Sovereign | unity. | | d | | | degree of | ty | | | the | | | sovereign | shared | | | Treaty of | | | ty. | between | | | Rome | | | | federal | | | (1957) | | | | and state | | | and later | | | | levels. | | | calls for | | | | | | | deeper | | | | 3. | | | political | | | | Emphasis | | | union in | | | | on | | | the EU. | | | | democrati | | | | | | | c | | | | | | | governanc | | | | | | | e | | | | | | | and | | | | | | | represent | | | | | | | ation. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 4. Views | | | | | | | political | | | | | | | unity as | | | | | | | necessary | | | | | | | for | | | | | | | lasting | | | | | | | peace. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 5. | | | | | | | Promotes | | | | | | | economic | | | | | | | and | | | | | | | defense | | | | | | | integrati | | | | | | | on. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 6. | | | | | | | Federal | | | | | | | structure | | | | | | | s | | | | | | | are | | | | | | | binding, | | | | | | | not | | | | | | | voluntary | | | | | | | or loose. | | | | +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+ | Neo-funct | Builds on | 1. | \- | Ernst B. | \- Key | | ionalism | Functiona | Integrati | Achieve | Haas, | theory | | | lism | on | integrati | Leon | during | | | but | starts in | on | Lindberg | early | | | includes | economic | through | | European | | | a | sectors | sectoral | | Economic | | | political | like | interdepe | | Community | | | dimension | trade and | ndence | | (EEC) | | | ; | energy. | leading | | developme | | | focuses | | to | | nt. | | | on | 2. | political | | | | | \"spillov | Political | union. | | \- Helped | | | er\" | spillover | | | explain | | | effects | : | | | integrati | | | from one | economic | | | on | | | sector to | integrati | | | patterns | | | others. | on | | | like the | | | | leads to | | | expansion | | | | demands | | | of EU | | | | for | | | competenc | | | | political | | | es | | | | cooperati | | | over | | | | on. | | | time. | | | | | | | | | | | 3. | | | | | | | Supranati | | | | | | | onal | | | | | | | instituti | | | | | | | ons | | | | | | | (e.g., | | | | | | | European | | | | | | | Commissio | | | | | | | n) | | | | | | | drive and | | | | | | | oversee | | | | | | | integrati | | | | | | | on. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 4. | | | | | | | Emphasize | | | | | | | s | | | | | | | the | | | | | | | importanc | | | | | | | e | | | | | | | of elites | | | | | | | and | | | | | | | interest | | | | | | | groups. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 5. | | | | | | | Recognize | | | | | | | s | | | | | | | gradual | | | | | | | loyalty | | | | | | | shift | | | | | | | from | | | | | | | national | | | | | | | to | | | | | | | supranati | | | | | | | onal | | | | | | | entities. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 6. | | | | | | | Explains | | | | | | | uneven | | | | | | | integrati | | | | | | | on | | | | | | | across | | | | | | | policy | | | | | | | areas | | | | | | | (e.g., | | | | | | | economics | | | | | | | vs. | | | | | | | defense). | | | | +-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+ 4. Modern theories   ***Seminar 5*** ***Institutions of the European Union -- European Council*** Overview The European Council is a central institution within the European Union (EU), comprising the Heads of State or Government of member states, the President of the European Council, and the President of the European Commission. Unlike the Council of the EU or the European Parliament, it does not legislate but sets the EU\'s overall direction and political priorities. It is the highest political authority in the EU and provides essential strategic guidance. Responsibilities and Functions 1\. Strategic Decision-Making: The European Council is responsible for making key, long-term decisions that shape the EU's future. This includes high-level policy directions, amendments to treaties, and strategic priorities that go beyond the scope of lower EU institutions. 2\. Crisis Management: The European Council plays a crucial role during crises, such as economic downturns, political conflicts, or security threats. It coordinates responses and formulates strategic plans to address these challenges effectively. 3\. Institutional Oversight: The European Council ensures coherence and alignment of EU policies across its institutions, overseeing progress to meet strategic objectives. 4\. Appointments and Nominations: The Council appoints its President, nominates the President of the European Commission, and selects other key EU officials, such as the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and the President of the European Central Bank. 5\. Consensus Building: The Council's work relies on achieving consensus among the member states, essential for decisions on sensitive and complex issues. Composition \- Members: The European Council includes the Heads of State or Government of all EU member states, the President of the European Council, and the President of the European Commission. The High Representative for Foreign Affairs also participates in discussions on external relations. \- President of the European Council: Elected for a renewable 2.5-year term, the President chairs meetings, facilitates dialogue, ensures continuity, and represents the EU externally at a high level. \- Supporting Roles: The General Secretariat supports the President in organizing meetings and coordinating documentation. Historical Evolution \- Origins and Early Development: The European Council originated from informal summits held in the early 1970s, becoming a formalized platform for leaders to discuss significant political and economic issues. The first official European Council meeting was in 1975. \- Institutionalization: The Maastricht Treaty (1992) formally acknowledged the European Council's role within the EU framework, elevating its status as a key body for decision-making. The Lisbon Treaty (2007) further institutionalized its role, creating a permanent President to enhance continuity and leadership. \- Role Expansion: Over time, the European Council's remit expanded to include structured involvement in crisis management, economic governance, and strategic foreign policy coordination. Role in Policy and Legislation \- Agenda Setting: The European Council sets the strategic agenda for the EU, influencing legislative priorities and guiding the work of the European Commission. \- Legislative Influence: While it does not enact laws, the European Council's conclusions outline key priorities and policies that other institutions, such as the European Commission and the Council of the EU, implement through legislative actions. \- Decision-Making Process: Decisions are primarily made by consensus, ensuring collective agreement among all member states. This method fosters unity but can slow down processes when significant disagreements arise. Operation and Procedures \- Meeting Frequency: The European Council meets at least four times a year, but extraordinary meetings can be convened during times of crisis or urgent matters. These meetings take place in Brussels. \- Agenda Preparation: The President, with input from member states and the General Secretariat, prepares the meeting agenda, focusing on substantial policy issues that need resolution. \- Meeting Structure: Sessions often begin with informal discussions, followed by formal deliberations. The outcomes are documented as 'European Council Conclusions,' which provide strategic directions and mandates for legislative actions. \- Implementation of Decisions: Once conclusions are adopted, they guide the work of other EU bodies, setting the stage for legislative initiatives by the European Commission and discussions in the Council of the EU. Interaction with Other EU Institutions \- European Commission: The European Council's conclusions guide the Commission's legislative proposals. The Commission drafts and implements policies aligned with the strategic objectives outlined by the Council. \- European Parliament: Although the European Council does not legislate, its influence is substantial, as its priorities set the context for legislative processes involving the European Parliament. \- Council of the European Union: The European Council's strategic directions shape the agenda and decisions within the Council of the EU, ensuring alignment with the highest political priorities. Challenges and Criticisms \- Democratic Accountability: Critics argue that the European Council's members are national leaders not directly elected to EU-level positions, which raises questions about transparency and democratic legitimacy. \- Consensus Dependency: While consensus-based decisions promote unity, they can lead to delays and diluted policies to ensure all member states agree, especially with 27 members. \- Balancing Interests: The European Council must balance national interests with collective EU objectives, which can result in compromises that impact the strength and effectiveness of certain policies. \- Complex Decision-Making: With the enlargement of the EU, reaching consensus has become increasingly complex, leading to longer negotiation periods and difficulties in achieving swift decisions. Key Achievements \- Economic and Monetary Union (EMU): The European Council was instrumental in planning and implementing the euro, facilitating deeper economic integration among member states and laying the foundation for the eurozone. \- Crisis Management: The European Council played a pivotal role during significant challenges, such as the 2008 financial crisis, coordinating responses and fostering agreements to support affected economies. \- Brexit and Geopolitical Strategy: The Council managed the complex process of the UK's withdrawal from the EU, negotiating terms and maintaining unity among the remaining member states. It also provides strategic responses to global challenges, enhancing the EU's influence in international affairs. \- Migration and Security: The European Council has overseen collective responses to migration pressures and coordinated security measures, including defense and counter-terrorism policies. Conclusion: The European Council is a cornerstone of the EU's political framework, providing strategic guidance and maintaining cohesion among member states. Its evolution from informal meetings to a key decision-making body underscores its critical role in the EU's governance. Despite challenges related to democratic accountability and complex decision-making, the European Council remains essential for setting long-term goals, ensuring unity, and navigating crises effectively. ***Lecture 6*** ***Ideas for Europe*** 1. Federalism Recurring elements: - Federal ideas -- Should Europe became like a federal entity - Differentiation between members -- Should Europe introduce two or three kinds of membership - European values Federal ideas in the 50s are just absolute, some archaic, part of musea, not political life. One of federal elements today in the EU is currency -- Euro. Federal Europe supporters: Winston Churchill (without Great Britain), Alcide de Gasperi and Robert Schuman, Christian democratic parties. Supporters now: The Greens, liberal parties, Paneuropean Movement (SINCE 70S), Social trade unions, late Archduke Otto von Habsburg (former leader of Paneuropean Movement and member of European Parliament; experience of Habsburg Empire can be very beneficial for shaping the future for Europe). 2. Habsburg lessons for embattled EU Core Argument: The EU faces challenges reminiscent of the Habsburg Empire\'s struggle to balance unity and diversity. Both grappled with integrating distinct identities, addressing economic disparities, and managing governance across a complex and diverse landscape. Parallels Between the EU and the Habsburg Empire: - Diversity as Strength and Challenge: The Habsburg Empire was a multi-ethnic state with significant linguistic, cultural, and religious diversity. The EU similarly includes nations with unique identities and priorities, risking fragmentation if unity is poorly managed. - Economic Disparities: The empire struggled with uneven development, leading to tensions between wealthier and poorer regions. The EU faces similar issues, particularly between its northern and southern states or older and newer member countries. - Governance Challenges: Centralized decision-making in Vienna alienated peripheral regions in the empire. The EU's centralized Brussels governance risks creating resentment among member states feeling ignored or overruled. - Nationalism and Populism: The Habsburg Empire's collapse was fueled by rising nationalism, which undermined central authority. The EU sees growing nationalist movements challenging integration and solidarity. Lessons for the EU: - Decentralization and Flexible Federalism: Allow member states and regions greater autonomy to address local needs while maintaining EU-wide unity. - Promotion of a Shared Identity: Highlight shared cultural and historical values to foster cohesion without erasing distinct identities. - Economic Integration and Redistribution: Invest in less-developed regions to bridge economic gaps and reduce inequalities among member states. - Responsive and Adaptive Institutions: Avoid bureaucratic rigidity and engage citizens in decision-making to prevent alienation and disillusionment. - Learning from Failures: The Habsburg collapse underscores the importance of balancing central authority with respect for regional diversity and democratic governance. 3. Differentiated Europe One term for all sets of political projects: - Multi-speed Europe: some countries will engage in deeper and faster cooperation, and some stays on the slower slope. - Europe of region: Europe which consists not from states, but from different regions. - Concentric circles Europe: there will be center, the group of states, original 6 members that will form the inner circle and they will engage in more close and deeper cooperation. Useful to analyze enlargement and association with EU. Internal circle -- Eurozone. - Hard core of the integration: some group of states feeling responsible for the future and develop of integration, should form a hard core and to radiate the influence and the example of benefits for fast and deep development. Especially promoted by France. - European confederation: stop the enlargement or make the enlargement much later. - Europe a la carte: British idea promoted by Margaret Thatcher. European integration, European Union is like a menu in the restaurant, should be like a very wide offer. Countries can pick the elements they want engage to and beneficial for them. - Europe of variable geometry: - "Small" Europe/ Carolinian Europe: a core group of Western European countries historically linked to Charlemagne\'s empire, including France, Germany, Italy, and the Benelux nations (Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg). This idea highlights a shared cultural and historical foundation, suggesting these nations could form a tightly integrated group within the broader European Union. It\'s sometimes used to discuss a \"two-speed\" Europe, where this core group advances more quickly on integration than other EU members. 4. European Way Charter of Fundamental rights was adopted in 2000, legally binding since 2009. This document brings together the most important personal freedoms and rights enjoyed by citizens of the EU into one legally binding document. Major parts: - - [Dignity] - Freedoms - Equality - Solidarity - Citizen's rights - Justice What does it mean to be European? - Open society; - Respect for minorities; - Freedom to express one's identity; - Progress is understood as widening sphere of individual choices; - Cosmopolitanism. Two choices of Europe: ***Seminar 6*** ***Institutions of the European Union -- European Parliament*** 1.Overview of the European Parliament (EP) The European Parliament (EP) is a critical institution of the European Union (EU) that functions as its directly elected legislative body. It plays a significant role in shaping EU policies, supervising other institutions, and representing the interests of EU citizens. Despite its reputation as a weaker legislative entity in its early days, the EP has evolved to become a powerful force within the EU framework. 2\. Powers and Influence of the European Parliament \- Legislative Role: The EP has substantial legislative powers, especially under the \*ordinary legislative procedure\* (formerly known as the co-decision procedure). It shares legislative authority with the Council of the EU and can amend or veto proposed legislation. \- \*Ordinary Legislative Procedure\*: The EP acts as a co-legislator, with equal standing to the Council. This procedure allows the EP to significantly shape EU laws, ensuring that its amendments and positions are considered. It involves up to three readings, and if disagreements persist, a conciliation committee may be convened. \- \*Consultation Procedure\*: The EP provides opinions on legislative proposals, but the Council is not bound to follow them. The 1980 \*Isoglucose case\* emphasized that the Council must at least wait for the EP\'s opinion before making a decision. \- \*Consent Procedure\*: Used for certain non-legislative acts, such as ratifying treaties and approving new member states. The EP has veto power but cannot amend proposals. \- Initiative and Policy Influence: The EP can request legislative proposals from the European Commission under \*Article 225 TFEU\*. Although the Commission is not obliged to comply, it generally considers EP proposals. The EP also adopts own-initiative reports, which highlight specific policy needs. \- Budgetary Powers: \- \*Multiannual Financial Frameworks (MFFs)\*: The EP plays a role in approving the MFF, which sets the EU's budget priorities over seven years. Its influence, however, is often limited by the prior agreements made by member states and the European Council. \- \*Annual Budget\*: The EP holds co-decision powers with the Council over the EU's annual budget. It can amend and ultimately approve or reject the budget. The Lisbon Treaty enhanced the EP\'s powers by removing the distinction between compulsory and non-compulsory expenditure. \- Supervision and Control: \- \*Oversight of the European Commission\*: The EP has the authority to approve the Commission President and the College of Commissioners. The \*Spitzenkandidaten\* system introduced in 2014 strengthened this role, linking the Commission President to EP elections. \- \*Motion of Censure\*: The EP can dismiss the entire Commission through a two-thirds majority vote, as demonstrated during the near-dismissal of the Santer Commission in 1999 following allegations of mismanagement. \- \*Hearings\*: Commissioner-designates undergo EP hearings before confirmation, ensuring accountability. \- \*Budget Discharge\*: The EP reviews the Commission's financial management annually and can grant or withhold discharge, reinforcing oversight of budget implementation. \- \*Special Committees and Investigations\*: The EP can form committees of inquiry, such as the 2015 Special Committee on Tax Rulings following the Lux Leaks scandal. 3\. EP Elections \- Direct Elections: Since 1979, MEPs have been directly elected every five years. Election methods vary by country, but proportional representation is used across all member states. \- Turnout and Voter Engagement: \- Voter turnout has been a concern, declining from 62% in 1979 to 42.6% in 2014. Factors contributing to low turnout include a perception of the EP\'s limited impact on national politics and the secondary nature of EP elections. \- Degressive Proportionality: MEP seats are distributed to reflect population size while ensuring smaller states are adequately represented. For example, in 2014, the number of citizens per MEP ranged from 875,000 in Spain to 77,000 in Luxembourg. 4\. Political Parties and Groups in the EP \- Transnational Party Federations: The European People's Party (EPP), Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats (S&D), and Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE) are the main political federations. They coordinate policies and election campaigns, though their influence is limited by national interests. \- EP Political Groups: \- Groups must consist of at least 25 MEPs from at least one-quarter of member states. Major groups include: \- \*EPP\*: Center-right, pro-integrationist, and the largest group. \- \*S&D\*: Center-left, advocating for social policies. \- \*ALDE\*: Centrist, pro-European. \- \*Greens/EFA\*, \*ECR\*, and others represent more specific or critical viewpoints. \- Internal Challenges: Groups face ideological and national divisions, affecting coherence and decision-making. Voting trends indicate high group loyalty, especially in the main centrist groups (e.g., 85% for EPP and S&D). 5\. Composition and Dual Mandates \- Diversity of MEPs: The composition of the EP reflects the political and demographic diversity of the EU. MEPs come from varied backgrounds, enhancing the representation of EU citizens. \- Dual Mandates: Initially common, dual mandates (holding office in national parliaments and the EP simultaneously) have significantly declined. By 1999, only 6% of MEPs held dual mandates. 6\. Organisation and Operation \- Plenary Sessions and Committees: \- The EP operates through plenary sessions where MEPs debate and vote on legislation. \- Committees: These are vital for legislative preparation and oversight. Committees such as the Committee on Budgetary Control play a crucial role in supervising financial management. \- Decision-Making Process: \- Most decisions are taken by a majority vote. Important legislative acts may require an absolute majority. 7\. Challenges and Criticisms \- Limited Legislative Power: Although its powers have expanded, the EP still lacks the ability to initiate legislation directly. \- Budgetary Constraints: The EP's influence over MFFs remains limited due to the dominant role of the European Council and the Commission in budget negotiations. \- Supervisory Limitations: The EP's control over the Council and European Council is minimal, as these bodies are primarily intergovernmental. Access to information and the ability to hold these bodies accountable are restricted. \- Engagement and Visibility: The EP's impact on the EU's democratic legitimacy is questioned due to low voter turnout and the indirect relationship between citizens and transnational party groups. 8\. Key Developments and Reforms \- Lisbon Treaty (2007): Strengthened the legislative and budgetary powers of the EP, making it a co-equal with the Council in most legislative areas and granting it full parity in budget matters. \- Spitzenkandidaten Process (2014): Enhanced the EP's influence by linking the selection of the Commission President to EP election outcomes. \- Brexit Impact: The departure of UK MEPs reshaped the political landscape of the EP, impacting group compositions and policy priorities. 9\. Conclusion: The European Parliament has grown from a relatively weak assembly to a powerful legislative body with significant influence over EU policy and decision-making. Despite certain limitations, it continues to evolve, balancing its role between legislative functions, budgetary powers, and executive oversight to enhance its impact on EU governance. ***Study questions 5&6*** 1. **Compare federalism and functionalism as tools to build European unity** The process of European integration has been shaped by various theories and approaches, among which federalism and functionalism stand out as two pivotal models. While both seek to enhance European unity, they do so through different mechanisms and philosophies. This comparison explores their main characteristics, methods, and impacts on the European Union (EU), emphasizing their significance as tools for building unity. 1\. Core Principles and Approaches - Federalism: Federalism advocates for a supranational structure in which power is constitutionally shared between a central authority and member states. The approach envisions the EU evolving into a federation similar to the United States, where member states retain some sovereignty but crucial powers, such as defense, monetary policy, and foreign affairs, are vested at the EU level. Federalism is based on the idea that comprehensive political integration is essential for achieving sustainable unity and effective governance. - Functionalism: In contrast, functionalism posits that European unity can be achieved incrementally through cooperation on specific, pragmatic issues rather than broad political agreements. This method focuses on addressing shared needs and building trust through sector-specific integration (e.g., coal and steel production, transport, energy). The idea is that successful cooperation in one sector creates momentum for further integration in related areas, leading to a cohesive structure over time. 2\. Historical Implementation and Impact - Federalism: The federalist approach has influenced various EU leaders and initiatives aiming for deeper political integration. For instance, early European visionaries like Altiero Spinelli proposed a Europe built on a federal structure. The Treaty of Maastricht (1992) embodied federalist principles by establishing the EU and introducing shared policies such as the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU). Despite these strides, federalism has faced resistance due to member states' concerns over national sovereignty and autonomy. - Functionalism: The European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) of 1951, spearheaded by Jean Monnet and Robert Schuman, epitomizes functionalist strategy. By integrating these vital industries, the ECSC reduced the risk of conflict between France and Germany, setting a precedent for collaboration. This step-by-step integration expanded through treaties like the Treaty of Rome, highlighting functionalism's effectiveness in fostering unity through practical cooperation. 3\. Strengths and Weaknesses Federalism: - Strengths: Federalism provides a structured and transparent governance framework that enhances democratic accountability and policy consistency at the EU level. It facilitates unified decision-making in areas such as foreign policy and security, which require cohesive action. - Weaknesses: The federalist approach often faces significant resistance due to concerns over loss of national sovereignty and cultural identity. The complex balance between EU-wide authority and member states' autonomy can lead to political tensions and hinder progress. Functionalism: - Strengths: Functionalism's gradual and issue-focused approach is politically feasible, as it emphasizes practical collaboration without directly challenging national sovereignty. This method can build mutual trust and demonstrate the tangible benefits of integration. - Weaknesses: Functionalism may result in uneven and sector-specific integration, creating potential disparities among member states. The lack of an overarching political vision can slow or complicate deeper unity, particularly in addressing cross-sectoral challenges. 4\. Relevance as Pivotal Tools for Modern European Unity - Federalism: Federalist principles remain relevant in discussions about the EU's future, especially in areas requiring coordinated responses to global challenges like economic crises, security threats, and climate change. Advocates argue that a stronger, more centralized EU governance structure is needed for effective and decisive action. - Functionalism: The EU's gradual expansion of competencies in areas like environmental policy, trade regulation, and judicial cooperation underscores the lasting influence of functionalism. The adaptable nature of functionalism is visible in the EU's multi-speed integration, where different member states can advance at their own pace while maintaining overall unity. Conclusion: Federalism and functionalism have both played pivotal roles in shaping European unity. Federalism provides a vision for comprehensive political integration and centralized governance, while functionalism offers a flexible and incremental path that builds unity through practical cooperation. The successful balance of these approaches may be key to addressing the EU's complex and evolving needs in the pursuit of deeper unity and resilience. 2. **Analyse different projects of differentiated integration. Are the usefull today?** Differentiated integration has become an essential feature of the European Union (EU), offering a flexible framework for managing the diversity of member states\' economic and political interests. This approach allows subsets of countries to deepen their cooperation in specific areas without mandating uniform participation from all EU members. This analysis explores key differentiated integration projects, their characteristics, and their current usefulness in addressing modern challenges. **1. Key Projects of Differentiated Integration** - **Schengen Agreement**: Initiated in 1985, the Schengen Agreement created a border-free travel zone that today includes 27 European countries, including non-EU members like Norway and Switzerland. Schengen has had a profound impact on facilitating mobility, economic activity, and social cohesion among its participants. The exclusion of certain member states, such as Ireland, highlights how differentiated integration can respect national preferences while achieving broad benefits for participants. - **Economic and Monetary Union (EMU)**: The EMU, which introduced the euro in 1999, stands as a significant milestone in economic integration. Nineteen of the 27 EU members use the euro, creating a shared economic identity and stability. Countries like Denmark and Sweden have opted out due to economic or political reasons, showcasing the EMU's flexibility in accommodating different national approaches while fostering deeper integration among participants. - **Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO)**: Established under the Treaty of Lisbon and launched in 2017, PESCO is a defense initiative that allows EU countries to collaborate on military capabilities and joint projects. Currently, 25 member states participate in various PESCO projects focusing on areas such as cybersecurity and joint training programs. This differentiated approach has bolstered EU defense collaboration without forcing participation from all members, reflecting varying national defense policies and priorities. - **Enhanced Cooperation Mechanism**: Enshrined in the Treaty of Amsterdam and expanded under the Lisbon Treaty, this mechanism allows at least nine EU member states to move forward with joint initiatives even when unanimity among all members is not reached. Notable examples include the European Public Prosecutor's Office, which investigates cross-border financial crimes, and cooperation in divorce law, which addresses differing national legal systems. **2. Characteristics and Benefits of Differentiated Integration** - **Flexibility**: Differentiated integration provides the EU with a pragmatic solution to accommodate varying levels of commitment and capacity among its member states. It allows pioneering groups to push forward with integration, setting precedents that others may follow later. - **Enhanced Cooperation without Stagnation**: Projects like PESCO and the Enhanced Cooperation Mechanism prevent integration from stalling due to lack of consensus, allowing interested countries to achieve deeper collaboration without waiting for unanimity. - **Maintaining Unity**: Differentiated integration helps balance deeper cooperation among willing participants while ensuring that the EU as a whole remains cohesive. This approach respects national sovereignty and reduces the risk of discontent or forced participation. **3. Contemporary Relevance and Usefulness** In today's EU, differentiated integration remains highly relevant for several reasons: - **Addressing Divergent Interests**: The EU\'s 27 member states have varying economic conditions, political priorities, and public sentiments towards integration. Differentiated integration offers a way to reconcile these differences by allowing states to advance at their own pace. - **Crisis Response**: The EU\'s approach to major crises, such as the COVID-19 pandemic and the war in Ukraine, has underscored the utility of differentiated integration. For instance, joint vaccine procurement demonstrated how flexible cooperation could benefit all members, even as some pursued national strategies. Similarly, PESCO has gained renewed importance in the context of heightened security concerns. - **Strengthening Core Policies**: Projects like the eurozone illustrate how differentiated integration can create a core group of countries that advance economic stability and integration while allowing others to maintain policy independence. Schengen's facilitation of travel and commerce remains crucial for economic recovery and resilience post-pandemic. - **Challenges**: Despite its advantages, differentiated integration can lead to fragmentation if not managed carefully. The risk of creating a "two-speed" Europe, where certain member states feel excluded from key projects, remains a concern. Managing these dynamics is critical to prevent divisions and maintain cohesion. **Conclusion** Differentiated integration has proven to be a valuable tool for advancing European unity in a way that respects national diversity and adapts to changing circumstances. Specific projects like Schengen, the EMU, and PESCO demonstrate how flexible participation can yield substantial benefits while allowing the EU to maintain momentum. While challenges related to cohesion and inclusivity persist, the approach\'s capacity to let willing member states collaborate deeply ensures that the EU can continue evolving. Today, as the EU faces complex geopolitical, economic, and social challenges, differentiated integration remains not only useful but necessary for sustaining progress and unity within an increasingly diverse union. 3. **What does it mean to live \"European way of life\"?** Living the \"European way of life\" generally refers to a set of cultural, social, and political values that are commonly associated with European societies. While this concept can vary somewhat depending on the specific country or region in Europe, it often embodies several key aspects: - Social Welfare and Public Services: Many European countries prioritize strong social safety nets, including universal healthcare, affordable education, generous parental leave, and pensions. The European way of life tends to emphasize the role of the s