|
National Sovereignty in the European Union
Several questions dominate discussions on the future of the
European Union. One of the most important of these questions is the
place of nation-state in the ever-integrating political union. In this
paper, we will explore the place of several nations in the history of
integration such as the United Kingdom, which has sough to maintain
economic and political sovereignty above European Union power; Germany,
whose post-war history is intensely intertwined with that of the Union;
as well as the situations in several smaller states who have sought
membership in order to benefit from the economic and political power of
the European Union. Next, we shall analyze the social, historical, and
political cultures and each nation and how those institutions have
effect both the behavior of the decision makers and the opinion of the
each national citizenry. Finally, we will consider several options and
possible outcomes as the European Union continues to expand and evolve,
the institutional factors that play into the decision to apply to the
European Union, and the factors that determine the approval of these
applications.
To begin, we explore the relationship between national sovereignty and
European integration in the United Kingdom. The British kingdom has
traditionally separated itself from being an integral part of Europe.
Separated from the mainland by the English Channel, the United Kingdom
has traditionally played its role as an imperial power, peacemaker, and
balance-provider in the scheme of European politics. However, its
history had given strength to an idea of uniqueness and separateness in
Europe. Even Winston Churchill once admitted that he would like to see a
United States of Europe comprising all of Western Europe except the
United Kingdom (McCormick 54).
Since World War II, however the United Kingdom saw challenges to and a
downfall in its power as the vision of potential of the European Union
began to take shape politically, socially, and economically.
Nevertheless, why did a nation such as the United Kingdom, with a strong
tradition of independence and self-reliance join an organization such as
the European Union?
Certainly, it was not to be joined to a federal system like the United
States of America. Britain, following World War II had lost much of its
influence both in Europe and in the world. With the loss of colonies,
international influence (especially following the thwarted Suez Canal
attack), and the decline of the British economy, the leaders of the
United Kingdom sought out membership in the European Economic Community
in order to reap the benefits of free trade, shared intelligence, and
closer relations with other member states in order to better negotiate.
It is likely that the vision of the European Union for British leaders
of the 1960s and 1970s was one of a confederation of independent states
that simply depended on economic free trade and military cooperation
rather than one that is moving towards full political, social, and
economic integration.
If Britain was not seeking the degree of integration in the European
Union that is occurring, why does the United Kingdom remain a member?
The United Kingdom has, of course evolved along with the European Union.
Yet, like Denmark it has chosen to retain the option of sovereignty in
some areas where other European Union members have fully integrated. One
example of this “opting out” by Britain is its decision to remain
outside of the European Central Bank and to retain its own economic
policies. Whereas, most of the qualifying members of the EU are in the
process of converting their national currencies to the euro, Britain is
retaining the pound and taking a “wait-and-see” approach to economic
integration. A second example of struggling to find a balance between
European and British sovereignty falls in the social policy arena. The
British Parliament has struggled to change its policies concerning
social issues. However, European Courts have instituted ruling and
procedures to bring British policy in compliance, but not without a
struggle nor without opposition in British public opinion.
A second example of balance between national sovereignty and
supranational integration occurs in the Federal Republic of Germany.
After World War II, Germany lay in shambles but it still had the
resources, especially coal and steel, to revitalize itself. In the minds
of Europeans, especially France, this potential power to revitalize also
brought with it the potential to threaten the security of Europe again.
In place of allowing the possibility of powerful new German state to be
created, France convinced West German leaders to create the European
Coal and Steel Community. This community was one of the forerunners to
the present day European Union. Thus, we can see that the German
Republic was created within the confines of an evolutionary process
toward European unity. Though it could be argued that the ECSC was
created to limit Germany’s power and force it to cooperate with
neighboring states, Germany has taken on a leading role in the
development of policies.
Having the largest population, a great deal of natural resources, a
tradition of stable government, and a centralized location has given
Germany a very important role in the progression of European federalism.
This role has come to view often, most recently with the proposals by
German chancellor Gerhard Schröder concerning the seemingly inevitable
political integration of the EU. He has proposed a system, based largely
on the German political system that would give greater power to the
European Union in some areas of political control and give certain
powers to the individual states. Much like the system of the United
States of America, this system would create a clearer divided between
the European (or federal) powers and the powers of the individual member
states. In an almost ironic twist, the state that theoretically was to
be confined and controlled by the European Coal and Steel Community has
taken a leading and powerful role in the evolutionary process. (New York
Times – “Germans Offer Plan to Remake European Union – May 01, 2001)
A third scenario of balance in the sovereignty struggle has occurred in
the smaller and poorer states of the southern areas of the European
Union. Spain, Portugal, and Greece were all dictatorships with
struggling economies before their membership in the European Union.
Certainly, the leaders of the dictatorial regimes had no reason to seek
out membership, but their heirs did. In order to achieve a successful
economic and political balance in their respective states, each
government sought out membership in a solid, democratic, and free market
organization. Rather than giving up valuable sovereignty in order to
reap economic benefits, these nations ceded unstable power in order to
reap economic benefits and to stabilize their political situations.
As we can see, there are plethoras of reasons why states have sought to
join the ever-evolving European Union. While most of these motives have
their basis in economic policy and stability, differing historical,
social, and political institutions have also been the determining
factors. Britain, a nation with a strong independent tradition and a
tradition of self-reliance, joined the European Union for primarily
economic and security benefits. The leaders of the United Kingdom choose
to relinquish as little political sovereignty as necessary in return for
the ability to participate in the western European free markets. As the
EU continues to evolve, so has the British outlook on European
cooperation in other arenas as well as the sense of Europeanism in
general
Germany, recreated after the war in the same crib as the European Union
has moved from being a seemingly forced participant in the European Coal
and Steel Community to being a leader in the European political scheme.
By using the institution created by France and other Allied European
nations, Germany has used it resources, population, location, and stable
democracy to act as a guiding force to the Union policy-makers, the
individual member states, and to the Eastern European state who are
applying for EU membership. Germany is likely to continue in its role as
a European leader and to continue (probably with the continual protests
of France and the United Kingdom) to guide the evolution of the European
Union’s political, social, economic, and military policies, especially
since Germany is responsible for the largest proportion of the European
Union’s budget.
What factors will cause new Eastern European nations to consider
membership in the ever integrating and expending European Union? Likely,
states will still seek membership in search of the economic benefits
that membership brings, but it is also likely that new states will have
to consider the loss of sovereignty that membership brings as the EU
continues to integrate. Most of the Eastern European states were
recently created from former communist dictatorships and may see
membership in the EU as a way to make their economy more stable and to
secure democracy in their nations. However, will these nations be ready
to hand over their newly gained democratic sovereignty permanently? It
remains to be seen, after the EU has evolved and integrated more,
whether states will have the option to join and leave the EU freely or
whether agreements will be made to bind member states together
permanently.
I believe that the European Union should continue to evolve into a
structure similar to the United States, especially on an economic basis.
As the global economy continues to evolve, it will be harder for smaller
nations to compete in large markets. The strength of economic union in
Europe will create a political institution with a gross national product
than any other. Since economic union is difficult to achieve without a
similar political and social policy, it is necessary to continue to
combine these institutions as well, but at the same time it will be
necessary to recognize the different cultural, historical, and
linguistic traditions in each state. This will likely be a difficult
task to achieve, but as the economics of the world continue to evolve
and congeal, so must the economics (and politics and social policy) of
the European Union as a world player.
|
