-------------------------------------------------------
Limitations to the Expansion of the European Union by Michael Steinberg
The growth and power presented in Europe today are not the traditional show of force that has dominated previous eras but a contemporary display of influence and tolerance that encourages possible hostiles into a collaborative relationship. Traditionally, a country demonstrates its power on others through its military, economic or cultural influence. Most manners of measurement of global power are based on this archaic principal. However, the manner in which Europe is progressing urges the countries within the European Union (EU) and non-EU countries to change their own views in order to benefit from cooperation or unity with each other and the greater supranational EU body. To quantify by traditional means the value of this cooperative unity is nearly impossible as the manner in which it is done is much too contemporary.
The end of the Cold War accelerated globalisation and promoted a change which significantly altered the direction, size and scope of the European Union, both politically and economically. From its foundation as a partnership based on resources to its current prominence as a single market, “each layer has emerged from intensive negotiations among national governments over the realization of European integration in concrete institutional and policy terms”. As its integration has intensified, “the EU’s impact on policy and politics has become far more conspicuous and important”. Today, it is difficult to assess the individual countries within the Union without understanding where they stand within the dynamic of the EU body and its other members.
More than doubling in membership since the war’s end, the EU now comprises nearly thirty countries, 500 million people and is a transformative force of change, cooperation, modernization and harmony for over half the nations of Europe. Since it is not a government in the traditional sense, as Europe is not a federation, “it is best understood as an association of states that have pooled a great degree of national sovereignty in supranational institutions well short of a full-fledged state” . In a growing interdependent world, despite irritations and inconveniences, countries would not have joined such an institution unless they believed that it would benefit them in economic growth and security. As time goes on, more power has been given to the EU as more standards are agreed upon.
Prior to the end of the Cold War, members did not need to define what sort of political institutions the member nations had to employ as they all had unquestioned democracies. They all shared common standards that reflected their individual historical prestige, cultural identity and power, at least common enough to not present any significant threat to the integrity of the Union. Besides, their membership status could always be revoked if the other members deemed that a nation’s political behaviour was unsavoury. However, the end of the war presented a new direction for the Union as it was now faced with a large number of countries wanting to join it. With this in mind, political reform was necessary in order to clarify what democratic standards were required.
The negotiations that outlined the Maastricht Treaty, which formulated the European Union in 1992, went far beyond the provisions for monetary unity. This treaty changed the nature of the Union from a primarily economic entity to a political one. To achieve an economic and monetary union, it was necessary to further political cooperation. In addition, it was now indispensable to define the democratic, legal, cultural, economic and monetary criteria that interested nations needed to meet in order to work on a level playing-field. The European institutions officially gained supranational authority to cover many areas, notably education, training, cohesion, research and development, environment, infrastructure, industry, health, culture, consumer protection and development cooperation . Also, formal intergovernmental agreements were made as to how a single currency would be achieved.
The Copenhagen Criteria set out the standards by which a country can join the European Union. They outline the rules for law, human rights, democracy, minority protection and compatible market economy. In addition, members must demonstrate the ability to take on the obligations of membership, including adherence to the aims of political, economic, and monetary union . Once a country meets these standards, it could be integrated as an equal member.
When the Amsterdam Treaty was signed in 1997, the EU itself was finally imbued with political values that stated: “the Union is founded on the principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law, principles which are common to the member states.” This treaty also included sanctions on those members who deviated from these values.
The Copenhagen Criteria state that “any European State which respects the principles set out in Article 6(1) may apply to become a member of the Union” but this statement does not explicitly explain what is meant by the term “European State” . Geographically, there is no international agreement that confirms without a level of doubt where the European Continent ends, as it is not a separate continental plate from Asia. Eurasia is thus the proper geographic distinction of both Europe and Asia. However, there is a clear ethnic, historical and religious dynamic that has distinguished Europe from its Asian and Middle-Eastern counterparts. Therefore, whether a country is considered European is no longer related to any geographical definition but is decided politically.
The Council of Europe (CoE) is another international body, similar to the EU, which focuses on European Integration. The CoE shares many goals with the EU. Unlike the European Union, where nations apply for membership, the Council of Europe (CoE) invites countries to become members of the Council. For this institution, in order to become a member, the country must be “European” and must guarantee democracy, fundamental human rights and freedoms and clearly respect the rule of law. Thus, it is up to the Council to determine what is considered a European Country. Unlike the EU where sovereignty is transferred from the nation to the EU institutions, members of the CoE commit themselves to the values of the forum. Thus, the commitment of the CoE is much wider and less demanding than that of the EU. Today, the CoE encompasses nearly every European country, with 47 members in total. To date, no country has joined the EU without first being a member of the CoE and it is often seen as a prerequisite to EU membership. The CoE’s membership and potential membership roster is the only functional guide on what can be considered a European Country.
This study will question the limits, if any, placed on the expansion of the EU. Arguably there is some form of limit based on geographical conceptions of Europe; however, further unions, for instance the Mediterranean Union, could continue to expand most of the EU’s privileges to areas beyond what the CoE classifies as Europe. As neighboring countries adhere to the political values of the EU, there could be no limitation on the reach of the EU’s power.
An analysis of the past efforts of expansion, present programs and agendas and possible futures of this expansion will be explored by comparing historical events and current political and long-term trends.
PAST:
The first area will explore the origins and enlargement of the Union from its foundations to its current standing of 27 members and their relationship to the 7 countries that
have refused membership. A larger focus will be placed on the most recent enlargement into Central and Eastern Europe that absorbed 12 new members, as their historical and economic clout gives a deeper insight on areas that the future trends of European expansion will have to explore. After many years of being exploited by their occupiers, these new members “were poorer then the poorest of the EU15” . The manner of resolving regional integration problems and disbalance in economic ability is a strong theme that will need to be examined for these new members as well as the possible future members. In addition, the issue of equalizing capabilities throughout the new members must also be combined with cultural compatibility of current and possible future members. This will be followed by an update on where they and the other members are today in terms of regional integration and what programs were employed to assist them before their membership, compared to the current programs that are assisting new candidates.
PRESENT:
The current sovereign-debt crisis emphasizes a significant issue of European integration. The manner in which it is currently being handled will considerably affect the future of European integration and expansion. As some members in the EU are not part of the monetary union, they are currently being excluded from significant decisions concerning reforms and projects to save the single currency. What started as exceptional meetings have now become more regular. This, as well as various other topics, has slowly developed the argument for a multi-speed Europe where integration would vary based on the level of consensus. Although the EU has tried to avoid this, in practice there are some forms of inner and outer clubs depending on the issues discussed. This multi-speed Europe can have ramifications on non-members as some countries do, and others could, have policies that are more in line with those of the EU members without being part of the Union.
Nonetheless, supposing that the sovereign debt crisis is averted, it is highly unlikely that there will be a change either in the EU’s current expansion objectives or in the other integration institutions that are currently in place.
The heart of the thesis will be an assessment of where the Current Enlargement agenda is headed, i.e. the Balkans, Iceland and Turkey, with greater emphasis being placed on Turkey. This will include the EU and non EU development organizations that are currently assisting these countries and the progress that they are making. Their development demonstrates a willingness of these nations to cooperate with the richer and more integrated countries in order to reach full membership status. There are five candidate countries currently in negotiation for membership, two more that have submitted applications and another two that are recognised by the EU as potential candidates but have not yet applied for membership. If they are all successfully integrated, this will bring the total EU members up to 36. The problems of the past enlargements as well as current attempts made at assimilating the candidate countries and the efforts made by development institutions will direct the trends of future enlargements. I predict the current enlargement will be concluded within the decade.
FUTURE:
Lastly, this thesis will explore the remaining 7 countries that the CoE calls ‘European’. Six of these countries are ex-USSR members and today they are directly in Russia’s sphere of influence. Their entry into the Union is therefore more complex than with the previous enlargements and may take much longer to accomplish as the issue of their integration relates to diplomatic issues with Russia. This section will explore the current efforts to bring Russia closer to the EU though economic trade and military cooperation. An overview will be made on what the current status of these relationships is and what trends can be determined. This will clarify how the six buffer states between the two giants will develop.
TEXTS:
This study will expand on the work of Frank Shimmelfenning entitled “Europeanization beyond Europe” (2009) which focuses on the degree to which European values are assimilated by outside countries. In addition to the aforementioned study, the European Council has authorized a few Reflection Groups to identify the key issues that the Union is likely to face from 2020 to 2030.
The end of the Cold War accelerated globalisation and promoted a change which significantly altered the direction, size and scope of the European Union, both politically and economically. From its foundation as a partnership based on resources to its current prominence as a single market, “each layer has emerged from intensive negotiations among national governments over the realization of European integration in concrete institutional and policy terms”. As its integration has intensified, “the EU’s impact on policy and politics has become far more conspicuous and important”. Today, it is difficult to assess the individual countries within the Union without understanding where they stand within the dynamic of the EU body and its other members.
More than doubling in membership since the war’s end, the EU now comprises nearly thirty countries, 500 million people and is a transformative force of change, cooperation, modernization and harmony for over half the nations of Europe. Since it is not a government in the traditional sense, as Europe is not a federation, “it is best understood as an association of states that have pooled a great degree of national sovereignty in supranational institutions well short of a full-fledged state” . In a growing interdependent world, despite irritations and inconveniences, countries would not have joined such an institution unless they believed that it would benefit them in economic growth and security. As time goes on, more power has been given to the EU as more standards are agreed upon.Prior to the end of the Cold War, members did not need to define what sort of political institutions the member nations had to employ as they all had unquestioned democracies. They all shared common standards that reflected their individual historical prestige, cultural identity and power, at least common enough to not present any significant threat to the integrity of the Union. Besides, their membership status could always be revoked if the other members deemed that a nation’s political behaviour was unsavoury. However, the end of the war presented a new direction for the Union as it was now faced with a large number of countries wanting to join it. With this in mind, political reform was necessary in order to clarify what democratic standards were required.
The negotiations that outlined the Maastricht Treaty, which formulated the European Union in 1992, went far beyond the provisions for monetary unity. This treaty changed the nature of the Union from a primarily economic entity to a political one. To achieve an economic and monetary union, it was necessary to further political cooperation. In addition, it was now indispensable to define the democratic, legal, cultural, economic and monetary criteria that interested nations needed to meet in order to work on a level playing-field. The European institutions officially gained supranational authority to cover many areas, notably education, training, cohesion, research and development, environment, infrastructure, industry, health, culture, consumer protection and development cooperation . Also, formal intergovernmental agreements were made as to how a single currency would be achieved.
The Copenhagen Criteria set out the standards by which a country can join the European Union. They outline the rules for law, human rights, democracy, minority protection and compatible market economy. In addition, members must demonstrate the ability to take on the obligations of membership, including adherence to the aims of political, economic, and monetary union . Once a country meets these standards, it could be integrated as an equal member.
When the Amsterdam Treaty was signed in 1997, the EU itself was finally imbued with political values that stated: “the Union is founded on the principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law, principles which are common to the member states.” This treaty also included sanctions on those members who deviated from these values.
The Copenhagen Criteria state that “any European State which respects the principles set out in Article 6(1) may apply to become a member of the Union” but this statement does not explicitly explain what is meant by the term “European State” . Geographically, there is no international agreement that confirms without a level of doubt where the European Continent ends, as it is not a separate continental plate from Asia. Eurasia is thus the proper geographic distinction of both Europe and Asia. However, there is a clear ethnic, historical and religious dynamic that has distinguished Europe from its Asian and Middle-Eastern counterparts. Therefore, whether a country is considered European is no longer related to any geographical definition but is decided politically.
The Council of Europe (CoE) is another international body, similar to the EU, which focuses on European Integration. The CoE shares many goals with the EU. Unlike the European Union, where nations apply for membership, the Council of Europe (CoE) invites countries to become members of the Council. For this institution, in order to become a member, the country must be “European” and must guarantee democracy, fundamental human rights and freedoms and clearly respect the rule of law. Thus, it is up to the Council to determine what is considered a European Country. Unlike the EU where sovereignty is transferred from the nation to the EU institutions, members of the CoE commit themselves to the values of the forum. Thus, the commitment of the CoE is much wider and less demanding than that of the EU. Today, the CoE encompasses nearly every European country, with 47 members in total. To date, no country has joined the EU without first being a member of the CoE and it is often seen as a prerequisite to EU membership. The CoE’s membership and potential membership roster is the only functional guide on what can be considered a European Country.
This study will question the limits, if any, placed on the expansion of the EU. Arguably there is some form of limit based on geographical conceptions of Europe; however, further unions, for instance the Mediterranean Union, could continue to expand most of the EU’s privileges to areas beyond what the CoE classifies as Europe. As neighboring countries adhere to the political values of the EU, there could be no limitation on the reach of the EU’s power.
An analysis of the past efforts of expansion, present programs and agendas and possible futures of this expansion will be explored by comparing historical events and current political and long-term trends.
PAST:
The first area will explore the origins and enlargement of the Union from its foundations to its current standing of 27 members and their relationship to the 7 countries that
have refused membership. A larger focus will be placed on the most recent enlargement into Central and Eastern Europe that absorbed 12 new members, as their historical and economic clout gives a deeper insight on areas that the future trends of European expansion will have to explore. After many years of being exploited by their occupiers, these new members “were poorer then the poorest of the EU15” . The manner of resolving regional integration problems and disbalance in economic ability is a strong theme that will need to be examined for these new members as well as the possible future members. In addition, the issue of equalizing capabilities throughout the new members must also be combined with cultural compatibility of current and possible future members. This will be followed by an update on where they and the other members are today in terms of regional integration and what programs were employed to assist them before their membership, compared to the current programs that are assisting new candidates.PRESENT:
The current sovereign-debt crisis emphasizes a significant issue of European integration. The manner in which it is currently being handled will considerably affect the future of European integration and expansion. As some members in the EU are not part of the monetary union, they are currently being excluded from significant decisions concerning reforms and projects to save the single currency. What started as exceptional meetings have now become more regular. This, as well as various other topics, has slowly developed the argument for a multi-speed Europe where integration would vary based on the level of consensus. Although the EU has tried to avoid this, in practice there are some forms of inner and outer clubs depending on the issues discussed. This multi-speed Europe can have ramifications on non-members as some countries do, and others could, have policies that are more in line with those of the EU members without being part of the Union.
Nonetheless, supposing that the sovereign debt crisis is averted, it is highly unlikely that there will be a change either in the EU’s current expansion objectives or in the other integration institutions that are currently in place.
The heart of the thesis will be an assessment of where the Current Enlargement agenda is headed, i.e. the Balkans, Iceland and Turkey, with greater emphasis being placed on Turkey. This will include the EU and non EU development organizations that are currently assisting these countries and the progress that they are making. Their development demonstrates a willingness of these nations to cooperate with the richer and more integrated countries in order to reach full membership status. There are five candidate countries currently in negotiation for membership, two more that have submitted applications and another two that are recognised by the EU as potential candidates but have not yet applied for membership. If they are all successfully integrated, this will bring the total EU members up to 36. The problems of the past enlargements as well as current attempts made at assimilating the candidate countries and the efforts made by development institutions will direct the trends of future enlargements. I predict the current enlargement will be concluded within the decade.
FUTURE:
Lastly, this thesis will explore the remaining 7 countries that the CoE calls ‘European’. Six of these countries are ex-USSR members and today they are directly in Russia’s sphere of influence. Their entry into the Union is therefore more complex than with the previous enlargements and may take much longer to accomplish as the issue of their integration relates to diplomatic issues with Russia. This section will explore the current efforts to bring Russia closer to the EU though economic trade and military cooperation. An overview will be made on what the current status of these relationships is and what trends can be determined. This will clarify how the six buffer states between the two giants will develop.TEXTS:
This study will expand on the work of Frank Shimmelfenning entitled “Europeanization beyond Europe” (2009) which focuses on the degree to which European values are assimilated by outside countries. In addition to the aforementioned study, the European Council has authorized a few Reflection Groups to identify the key issues that the Union is likely to face from 2020 to 2030.
No comments:
Post a Comment