There are some who would argue that the problem with the European Union is that it has forgotten why it exists. From the initial formative Franco-German focus on coal and steel, the aim was economic cooperation and union. From this it was assumed that political union would follow as night follows day.
Past and present EU tensions have been created by those who believe that union can be created by a revolutionary act of political will rather than an economic evolution that leads inexorably to political union. The creation of the 15 member eurozone was, in the final analysis, a political rather than an economic act. Stronger economies such as France and Germany still wrestle with sharing a currency with anarchic economies such as Greece and Italy.
The Euro-chickens may be coming home to roost in Lisbon this week as Portugal hosts the latest “make-or-break” EU summit. On the table is a new European treaty which, in response to a much enlarged community of 27 member states, redefines voting- and blocking-powers and proffers an EU president and foreign affairs supremo. These radical revisions to the way Europe conducts its affairs are fundamentally constitutional. However, supporters of the deal insist that this is nothing like the proposed EU Constitution that was rejected so decisively in referendums in France and the Netherlands.
This, EU citizens are being told, is a treaty not a constitution. Yet an authoritative British parliamentary committee charged with EU oversight has gone on record as saying that it can see little difference in the terms of the rejected constitution and the new treaty. This has been borne out by assurances given to their supporters from Euro-enthusiasts such as Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel that the proposed treaty contains all the important elements of the old constitution.
The issue here is what EU voters are to make of all this maneuvering at the top table. The Poles have raised a last-minute threat to block agreement unless there are changes to the proposed new voting system. Euro-enthusiasts dismiss this as political posturing by the nationalist Kaczynski government ahead of Sunday’s Polish elections. The Italians are also concerned about diminished voting power and the Euro-skeptic British have arrived with a series of “red lines” which would apparently exempt them from parts of the new deal.
Those dedicated to an enhanced Europe are saying once again, as they did at the last formative summit in Nice, that agreement must be reached. However, nominal unity at the price of actual disunity among EU citizens as a whole threatens long-term European future. Forcing the pace of change without securing the economic unity which Europeans will most appreciate, because it affects their pockets, is a dangerous strategy that jeopardizes the cohesion of Europe which the rest of the world needs so much.
