Half a century of the EU
By Shadaba Islam
THE European Union marks its 50th birthday on March 25, with a special summit in Berlin. Leaders from the 27-nation bloc will use the celebrations to issue a special declaration outlining their common values and aspirations.
There will be much self-congratulation in the recognition that the last half-century has seen the EU spectacularly exceeding the goals set by its six founding nations in the aftermath of the Second World War.
The presidents and premiers will also have to admit, however, that the opening years of the 21st century have been especially unkind to Europe. Todayââ¬â¢s EU is in the midst of an unprecedented crisis of confidence, racked by doubts and uncertainties about the future. Much of the anxiety is due to last yearââ¬â¢s rejection of a new constitution by French and Dutch voters. Europeans are also worried about the impact of globalisation on their jobs and uneasy about further EU enlargement, especially plans to bring in mainly Muslim Turkey into the bloc.
Itââ¬â¢s been a long and impressive 50 years, however. The now 27-member EU with 490 million people was created as the European Economic Community (EEC) under the Treaty of Rome by Belgium, France, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and West Germany on March 25, 1957.
Built on the ruins of the Second World War the EU was established largely to prevent another war between Germany and France by forging strong economic bonds between the two nations. France and Germany fought three wars between 1870 and 1945. "The European unification idea came from the realisation that Europe's nation-states would -- if left on their own -- never break out of the vicious circle of war and destruction," said German Chancellor Angela Merkel in a recent speech.
Starting with the 1951 European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC), post-War leaders in western Europe created an array of joint institutions designed to draw their countries into an ever closer economic and political union. As a result of these ties, the idea of war between Berlin and Paris has become unthinkable.
Battles between the two countries in today's Europe are limited to economic issues, including a current contest on which country gets to build parts of the new Airbus A350 jet.
The two EU heavyweights are widely recognised as the "motors" behind the bloc's rapid development over the last half-century. According to conventional wisdom in Brussels and other EU capitals, political and economic progress in the bloc is conditional on the ââ¬Åspecial relationshipââ¬Â between Paris and Berlin.
Over the years, with Germany and France in the vanguard, the EU has broken down national trade barriers to create a single market and agreed to the free cross-border movement of EU citizens who are generally allowed to work and live in any country in the bloc. Another landmark agreement was the creation of the euro single currency in 2002. So far 13 EU states have replaced their old national currencies with the euro.
The EU at the moment lacks similar visionary projects, however. Upcoming presidential elections in France, pitting Socialist icon Segolene Royal against the conservative politician Nicolas Sarkozy, mean that any major new ideas for revitalising the EU are on ice. Also, the rejection of the bloc's constitution by voters in France and the Netherlands in 2005 has pitched the entire European project into crisis. So far nobody has come up with any concrete ideas on how to get France and the Netherlands back on board.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel had vowed to use Germany's EU presidency -- which lasts through June -- to make a big push for the old constitution text. But recognising that little can be achieved until Paris and The Hague decide what they want, the German leader is now only talking about setting a constitution timetable.
Further EU enlargement is also causing discord. While the six pioneering EU nations retain important policymaking clout, successive enlargements have also seen the entry of other influential nations -- including Britain in 1973, Spain in 1986 and Poland in 2004.
"Enlargement is one of the EUââ¬â¢s most powerful policy tools," says a senior EU diplomat. In the 1980s, the prospect of joining Europe helped spur democracy in Greece, Spain and Portugal. In the late 1990s, it was the pull of the EU that helped transform central and eastern Europe into modern, well-functioning democracies.
The EU's big bang expansion in May 2004 to include eight former communist nations as well as Malta and Cyprus was the bloc's fifth and most ambitious enlargement to date. Continuing the process, Bulgaria and Romania were welcomed into the club on January 1, 2007. Their entry symbolised a further "reunification of our European family," said an enthusiastic European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso.
EU policymakers insist they are still committed to using the bloc's "soft power" ability to bring peace, stability and prosperity to countries in its immediate neighbourhood. But EU leaders, voicing increasing wariness of further expansion, now insist that the future pace of enlargement will be dictated by the ability of present members to "absorb and integrate" the mainly poorer states knocking at EU gates.
Membership negotiations are under way with Croatia and -- at least partially -- with Turkey. Macedonia has been recognised as eligible for entry although actual accession discussions have yet to begin. EU enlargement chief Olli Rehn also remains adamant that the club has not closed its doors to western Balkan nations which he says have a "clear European perspective".
However, the going is getting tougher even for new members. Several "old" EU nations have maintained restrictions on the free movement of citizens from central and eastern European countries which joined the bloc in 2004. Also Romania and Bulgaria are subject to stringent "accompanying measures" -- the toughest ever imposed by the EU on acceding nations -- which could include trade and aid sanctions if they do not fight corruption and organised crime.
With many in Brussels and other EU capitals talking openly of "enlargement fatigue", Barroso is among those insisting that the bloc must decide on the future of the failed constitution before any further expansion. Officials in Brussels argue that the EU needs a new treaty to ensure efficient and effective decision-making in an enlarged Europe. There is also concern at the budgetary costs of further expansion.
Most significantly, however, EU hopefuls are being told they must wait patiently in the wings while the bloc's leaders try to ease public fears about increased east-west immigration flows. Much-publicised French public concerns about a flood of cheap "Polish plumbers" who would steal French jobs are believed to have convinced some voters to reject the EU constitution.
Fears about the entry of mainly Muslim Turkey are also believed to have contributed to the cold-shouldering of the treaty by French and Dutch nationals. "We know we cannot take in every state that wants to join," German Chancellor Merkel said after the EU leadersââ¬â¢ meeting in Brussels on December 14-15 last year adopted a go-slow stance on further expansion.
Backing Merkel's stance are the leaders of Luxembourg, Belgium and The Netherlands. France is also wary about swift, further enlargement. Although Britain, Sweden and most of the central and eastern European states want expansion to continue, leaders at the summit agreed that new countries will only be admitted if existing EU states are satisfied they can deal with financial, social and institutional burdens the applicants pose.
This will impact not only on Turkey and Croatia, which are negotiating EU entry, but also disappoint western Balkan states -- Serbia, Montenegro, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Albania and Kosovo ââ¬â which are clamouring to enter the bloc. The new approach also effectively puts a lid on EU entry aspirations harboured by Ukraine and Georgia.
There is some good news, however, with EU nations slowly but surely flexing their muscles on the global stage. True, EU governments have been -- and often remain -- at loggerheads over how best to deal with global flashpoints. Disagreements over the pros and cons of the US-led Iraq war -- which was backed by Britain, Spain and Italy but opposed by France and Germany -- provided the worst example of EU infighting over foreign policy. However, while the discord clearly tarnished Europe's international image, it has spurred EU efforts to try and forge a united front on global affairs.
One result was the adoption of adopt a first-ever EU "security strategy" in 2003, underlining Europe's commitment to strong international institutions and the use of "soft power" instruments of trade and aid to prevent crisis. "Trade and development policies can be powerful tools for reform," the strategy underlined, adding: "A world seen as offering justice and opportunity for everyone will be more secure."
However, the soft approach -- compared to the US policy of giving priority to military action -- was tempered by the recognition that more active policies were needed to tackle "new dynamic threats" including terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. When diplomacy failed, the strategy said the EU would be ready to envisage "early, rapid and when necessary, robust intervention."
Since then 16 civilian and military missions have been deployed across the world - including in Bosnia, Darfur, the Palestinian territories and Iraq -- often in partnership with the UN, the 26-nation Nato military alliance and the African Union.
EU officials point out that the EU's role as world security actor is "unique" because it combines military and civilian operations when tackling crises. In addition to a lead role in seeking to defuse the nuclear crisis with Iran, the EU last year sent troops to supervise national elections in Congo and to monitor a ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah fighters in Lebanon. EU forces are also deployed in the Balkans. EU foreign and security policy chief Javier Solana recently predicted an increase in international demand for EU peace missions, including in Afghanistan and Kosovo.
http://www.dawn.com/2007/03/07/ed.htm#3
By Shadaba Islam
THE European Union marks its 50th birthday on March 25, with a special summit in Berlin. Leaders from the 27-nation bloc will use the celebrations to issue a special declaration outlining their common values and aspirations.
There will be much self-congratulation in the recognition that the last half-century has seen the EU spectacularly exceeding the goals set by its six founding nations in the aftermath of the Second World War.
The presidents and premiers will also have to admit, however, that the opening years of the 21st century have been especially unkind to Europe. Todayââ¬â¢s EU is in the midst of an unprecedented crisis of confidence, racked by doubts and uncertainties about the future. Much of the anxiety is due to last yearââ¬â¢s rejection of a new constitution by French and Dutch voters. Europeans are also worried about the impact of globalisation on their jobs and uneasy about further EU enlargement, especially plans to bring in mainly Muslim Turkey into the bloc.
Itââ¬â¢s been a long and impressive 50 years, however. The now 27-member EU with 490 million people was created as the European Economic Community (EEC) under the Treaty of Rome by Belgium, France, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and West Germany on March 25, 1957.
Built on the ruins of the Second World War the EU was established largely to prevent another war between Germany and France by forging strong economic bonds between the two nations. France and Germany fought three wars between 1870 and 1945. "The European unification idea came from the realisation that Europe's nation-states would -- if left on their own -- never break out of the vicious circle of war and destruction," said German Chancellor Angela Merkel in a recent speech.
Starting with the 1951 European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC), post-War leaders in western Europe created an array of joint institutions designed to draw their countries into an ever closer economic and political union. As a result of these ties, the idea of war between Berlin and Paris has become unthinkable.
Battles between the two countries in today's Europe are limited to economic issues, including a current contest on which country gets to build parts of the new Airbus A350 jet.
The two EU heavyweights are widely recognised as the "motors" behind the bloc's rapid development over the last half-century. According to conventional wisdom in Brussels and other EU capitals, political and economic progress in the bloc is conditional on the ââ¬Åspecial relationshipââ¬Â between Paris and Berlin.
Over the years, with Germany and France in the vanguard, the EU has broken down national trade barriers to create a single market and agreed to the free cross-border movement of EU citizens who are generally allowed to work and live in any country in the bloc. Another landmark agreement was the creation of the euro single currency in 2002. So far 13 EU states have replaced their old national currencies with the euro.
The EU at the moment lacks similar visionary projects, however. Upcoming presidential elections in France, pitting Socialist icon Segolene Royal against the conservative politician Nicolas Sarkozy, mean that any major new ideas for revitalising the EU are on ice. Also, the rejection of the bloc's constitution by voters in France and the Netherlands in 2005 has pitched the entire European project into crisis. So far nobody has come up with any concrete ideas on how to get France and the Netherlands back on board.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel had vowed to use Germany's EU presidency -- which lasts through June -- to make a big push for the old constitution text. But recognising that little can be achieved until Paris and The Hague decide what they want, the German leader is now only talking about setting a constitution timetable.
Further EU enlargement is also causing discord. While the six pioneering EU nations retain important policymaking clout, successive enlargements have also seen the entry of other influential nations -- including Britain in 1973, Spain in 1986 and Poland in 2004.
"Enlargement is one of the EUââ¬â¢s most powerful policy tools," says a senior EU diplomat. In the 1980s, the prospect of joining Europe helped spur democracy in Greece, Spain and Portugal. In the late 1990s, it was the pull of the EU that helped transform central and eastern Europe into modern, well-functioning democracies.
The EU's big bang expansion in May 2004 to include eight former communist nations as well as Malta and Cyprus was the bloc's fifth and most ambitious enlargement to date. Continuing the process, Bulgaria and Romania were welcomed into the club on January 1, 2007. Their entry symbolised a further "reunification of our European family," said an enthusiastic European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso.
EU policymakers insist they are still committed to using the bloc's "soft power" ability to bring peace, stability and prosperity to countries in its immediate neighbourhood. But EU leaders, voicing increasing wariness of further expansion, now insist that the future pace of enlargement will be dictated by the ability of present members to "absorb and integrate" the mainly poorer states knocking at EU gates.
Membership negotiations are under way with Croatia and -- at least partially -- with Turkey. Macedonia has been recognised as eligible for entry although actual accession discussions have yet to begin. EU enlargement chief Olli Rehn also remains adamant that the club has not closed its doors to western Balkan nations which he says have a "clear European perspective".
However, the going is getting tougher even for new members. Several "old" EU nations have maintained restrictions on the free movement of citizens from central and eastern European countries which joined the bloc in 2004. Also Romania and Bulgaria are subject to stringent "accompanying measures" -- the toughest ever imposed by the EU on acceding nations -- which could include trade and aid sanctions if they do not fight corruption and organised crime.
With many in Brussels and other EU capitals talking openly of "enlargement fatigue", Barroso is among those insisting that the bloc must decide on the future of the failed constitution before any further expansion. Officials in Brussels argue that the EU needs a new treaty to ensure efficient and effective decision-making in an enlarged Europe. There is also concern at the budgetary costs of further expansion.
Most significantly, however, EU hopefuls are being told they must wait patiently in the wings while the bloc's leaders try to ease public fears about increased east-west immigration flows. Much-publicised French public concerns about a flood of cheap "Polish plumbers" who would steal French jobs are believed to have convinced some voters to reject the EU constitution.
Fears about the entry of mainly Muslim Turkey are also believed to have contributed to the cold-shouldering of the treaty by French and Dutch nationals. "We know we cannot take in every state that wants to join," German Chancellor Merkel said after the EU leadersââ¬â¢ meeting in Brussels on December 14-15 last year adopted a go-slow stance on further expansion.
Backing Merkel's stance are the leaders of Luxembourg, Belgium and The Netherlands. France is also wary about swift, further enlargement. Although Britain, Sweden and most of the central and eastern European states want expansion to continue, leaders at the summit agreed that new countries will only be admitted if existing EU states are satisfied they can deal with financial, social and institutional burdens the applicants pose.
This will impact not only on Turkey and Croatia, which are negotiating EU entry, but also disappoint western Balkan states -- Serbia, Montenegro, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Albania and Kosovo ââ¬â which are clamouring to enter the bloc. The new approach also effectively puts a lid on EU entry aspirations harboured by Ukraine and Georgia.
There is some good news, however, with EU nations slowly but surely flexing their muscles on the global stage. True, EU governments have been -- and often remain -- at loggerheads over how best to deal with global flashpoints. Disagreements over the pros and cons of the US-led Iraq war -- which was backed by Britain, Spain and Italy but opposed by France and Germany -- provided the worst example of EU infighting over foreign policy. However, while the discord clearly tarnished Europe's international image, it has spurred EU efforts to try and forge a united front on global affairs.
One result was the adoption of adopt a first-ever EU "security strategy" in 2003, underlining Europe's commitment to strong international institutions and the use of "soft power" instruments of trade and aid to prevent crisis. "Trade and development policies can be powerful tools for reform," the strategy underlined, adding: "A world seen as offering justice and opportunity for everyone will be more secure."
However, the soft approach -- compared to the US policy of giving priority to military action -- was tempered by the recognition that more active policies were needed to tackle "new dynamic threats" including terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. When diplomacy failed, the strategy said the EU would be ready to envisage "early, rapid and when necessary, robust intervention."
Since then 16 civilian and military missions have been deployed across the world - including in Bosnia, Darfur, the Palestinian territories and Iraq -- often in partnership with the UN, the 26-nation Nato military alliance and the African Union.
EU officials point out that the EU's role as world security actor is "unique" because it combines military and civilian operations when tackling crises. In addition to a lead role in seeking to defuse the nuclear crisis with Iran, the EU last year sent troops to supervise national elections in Congo and to monitor a ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah fighters in Lebanon. EU forces are also deployed in the Balkans. EU foreign and security policy chief Javier Solana recently predicted an increase in international demand for EU peace missions, including in Afghanistan and Kosovo.
http://www.dawn.com/2007/03/07/ed.htm#3
