Navigating the Crossroads: The European Union in 2024

Navigating the Crossroads: The European Union in 2024

Preface:

The spectre of nationalism, a historical scourge of Europe, looms large, threatening the hard-won peace and stability achieved by the European Union (EU). Former French President François Mitterrand’s poignant declaration in his final address at the European Parliament in 1995, “Le nationalisme, c’est la guerre!” echoes the centuries of conflict that shaped European nations and impacting the lives of millions.

Historical Context:

The EU emerged as a beacon of hope post-World War II, replacing the destructive force of nationalism with a vision of unity. The Marshall Plan, underpinning economic recovery, laid the foundation for the EU’s transformative journey, guided by the eleven founder fathers, among them visionaries like Schuman, De Gasperi, and Adenauer.

The Treaty of Paris in 1952 and the Treaty of Rome in 1957 were the first steps on the road to European Federalism. Influenced by historic events at the end of the last decade, including the end of the Cold War, and German reunification, the European Union embarked on a path of expansion and fundamental change, prioritising enlargement over integration.

Maastricht Treaty and Beyond:

The Maastricht Treaty of 1992 marked a further milestone, introducing the three-pillar system, integrating the European Commission as one of the three pillars into the European Union and Economic and Monetary Union (EMU). Yet, despite achievements like the single market, failures post-Maastricht negatively influenced the integration of the European Union and missed opportunities challenge the EU’s path to deeper integration.

Contemporary Challenges:

Amidst global challenges—climate disruption, pandemics, inequality—the EU faces a crucial juncture. The war in Ukraine, declining American hegemony, changes in the current world order and enlargement debates demand reflection and decisions that prioritize consolidation over expansion.

Cultural challenges

There are next to the difference between the North and South members show a gap between the fiscally pious nations above of the Alps and the profligate countries in the South, also there are stark differences between West and East members in public attitudes toward national identity, religion, minorities and social issues such as gay marriage and legal abortion. With the continental divide in attitudes and values sharp disparities emerge.  These differences in culture, values and commitments to the democratic-, legal values and human rights and legal values, have strained the cohesion of the union and to address the persistent breach of these values are challenging and need careful consideration in decision-making.

Inflection Point:

The proposed fast-track EU membership for Ukraine and the expansion to 36 or 37 members underscore the urgency for re-evaluation and strategic decisions. A future shift in power dynamics from Franco-German to Central European constellation raises concerns about a potential EU split and calls for a return to the EU15 Charlemagne.

Influence of Jacques Delors:

Jacques Delors’ influence and rational-pragmatic style, akin to Jean Monnet, shaped the union toward a socially embedded capitalism, opposed to the neo-liberal character of US capitalism, fostering a social Europe alongside the single market and EMU introducing a single currency, creating a strong symbol of European integration, Delors’ warnings about strengthening the constitutional basis of the EU before enlargement fell on deaf ears in 1992, setting a precedent for future challenges.

EU Expansion Challenges:

Post-1992, EU expansion revealed haste, compromising on the accession criteria established by the Copenhagen European Council in 1993 and strengthened by the Madrid European Council in 1995. Enlargement in 2003, came about under American influence and witnessed a failure to enforce standards, leading to serious breaches in Hungary and Poland. While the EU eventually acted, the challenge lies in balancing emotional responses to crises with pragmatic, long-term considerations.

Dilemma of Enlargement:

President von der Leyen’s vision of expanding to 36 or 37 members, a catalyst for progress, raises doubts about the strategic direction of the EU and the benefits. Enlargement is more based on the strategic relationship with the US, than on the logic of creating a strong strategically independent Europe and begs the question about the limits of expansion. CEE members remain net receivers from the “strained” EU budget, while net contributors face increased “solidarity” contributions. Political commitments indicate a failure to balance emotional reactions with more sustainable solutions.

Decision making process and constitutional reform:

In various matters from foreign policy to taxes, the EU currently “requires unanimous decisions” from all twenty-seven member states which has development of the union and led to blocking of decisions. Further expansion requires decisions to be made “by a qualified majority” on all matters. This would change would speed up the decision-making process but in itself requires unanimity.

Enlargement, a high-risk strategy, will require reforms and treaty changes. This holds the danger to provide opportunities for Eurosceptic leaders to weaken the EU further by transferring powers to the national level” on issues such as law, migration, and human rights. Some changes would require referendums in some countries, mostly decided on domestic considerations. With rejection of referendums this leaves the door open to a constitutional crisis.

The adaption of the decision decision-making processes, and constitutional reform is crucial, given the complexities within the EU’s governance structure and the need for adaptation to ensure effective decision-making in an expanding union.

Macron’s Pragmatic Approach:

President Macron’s three-tier Europe, a more gradual path to EU membership, was rejected in favour of a riskier expansion approach. In the context of the current challenges, this rejection, influenced by opportunism, undermines considerations of economic readiness, democratic principles, and regional stability.

Limits of Expansion:

As geopolitical tensions rise and Populism challenges unity, the EU must assess its capacity to reform and expansion. With institutional gridlock looming, a disconnect between EU institutions and the public must be addressed, necessitating a re-evaluation of governance structures.

Consolidation for Self-Defence:

The EU faces a critical choice between expansion and consolidation for self-defence. A clear prioritization of strategic interests and the protection of achievements made over fifty years is essential for navigating an increasingly complex global landscape.

Ukraine – Russia Conflict

The Ukraine – Russian conflict, which has turned into a war of attrition, is a tragedy for both countries and its people, but also a conflict that could have been avoided in the same way this was created, by making Ukraine a pawn on the geopolitical chessboard for American influence in the Eurasian Balkans. Instead of being a bridge between Russia and the West as a neutral state in world affairs, Ukraine made the choice to be a bridgehead against Russia.

With the conflict entering its third winter and can be likely measured in years, Ukraine deserves the support of the union but in a more pragmatic manner with conditions attached to our assistance, leading to a negotiated settlement.

Ukraine’s Candidacy:

The acceptance of Ukraine’s EU candidacy, a country at war, amid historical ties with Poland, is a delicate situation. The EU must avoid superficial gestures, recognizing the complexities and challenges posed by Ukraine’s current circumstances.

EU’s Relationship with the US:

Reflecting on the past thirty years, the EU’s reliance on the US for security has hindered its strategic autonomy. The EU must reassess this relationship, especially as the US grapples with internal challenges, safeguarding Europe’s sovereignty.

Geopolitical Shifts:

The current crisis signals a pivotal moment, demanding Europe’s return to strategic independence. The EU must break free from its role as an American protectorate and establish a more independent and substantive global presence, which translates its economic power into-geo-political influence.

Balancing Relations:

Decoupling from China and aligning with the US in a new Cold War poses risks to the EU’s economic and geopolitical interests. A more balanced, pragmatic approach is crucial, maintaining cooperation with both the US and China while maintaining stability and securing greater strategic autonomy for Europe.

Conclusion:

Europe needs to discover its strength and prepare for a harsher competition in the increasingly unstable global environment and must develop a more compartmentalized strategy. Europe must resist being drawn into global power contests, America’s wars of convenience and recognize its strength lies in independent decision-making. The EU must take responsibility for its foreign and security policy to avoid irrelevance and isolation in the evolving global order.

WJJH 19/2/2024

Diatribe: The European Union has arrived in 2024 at a pivotal moment, a EU’s inflection point, which emphasized Europe’s need to assert its independence and make strategic decisions for its future.