Notes on the European Union


1) Key theoretical approaches to the European Integration Background – Intellectual context -­? to understand the theories of European integration, it is important to consider the intellectual context from which the idea of European integration emerged Federalism – Altiero Spinelli -­? -­? -­? -­? -­? Spinelli: leader of the European Union of Federalists: Idea: after the Second World War, the classes most privileged under old national system will seek a new order of nation states, that might appear democratic, but the power will return to the privileged classes eventually a? renewing war between states Proposal: to prevent this development, create a federal.

European state to subordinate national governments to a federal authority a? strategy of the Federalists, aimed to create a federal constitution for Europe Development: Congress took time to organize, taken place in Hague in 1948. By that time, national political systems were already re-­? established a? Congress turned into the Council of Europe, not a new federal constitutional order Problem: diversity of Europe, different connotations in different part of Europe Mitrany: born in Romania, lived in UK and US, to build a “working peace system”, influencing integration theorists Against federalism b/c: o Single.

World government = threat to individual freedom o Regional federations = reproducing national rivalries on a larger scale Idea: root of the war = nationalism Proposal: create a separate international functional agencies, each with authority over specific area of human life o Scheme: individual tasks taken out of the control of the government, handing them to the functional agencies o Argument: Governments will surrender control because they will not fear the loss of sovereignty over e. g. health care, but rather appreciate the advantages of such tasks performed at the regional/world level o a? the more areas of control surrounded, the less states are capable of independent action a?

The harder it is to break from the agencies Jean Monnet: planner of a Schuman Plan Combining ideas of functionalism and federalism, crucial for the neofunctionalist theory of European integration Functionalism – David Mitrany -­? -­? -­? -­? Functional-­? Federalism – Jean Monnet -­? -­? -­? -­? Idea: European nation state is inadequate as an economic unit Proposal: developing of supranational institutions as the basis for building economic community (coal and steel at the beginning) o Scheme: remove control of the strategically crucial industries (coal and steel) from the governments, handing over to a free-­? standing agency (High Authority) o Challenge:

Western German State o Solution: strategic industries removed from German control; ensuring adequate supplies of coal for the French steel industry a? economies are interconnected Theories Neofuncionalism – Ernst Haas -­? -­? -­? -­? -­? Pluralist theory – state not a single unified actor, neither it is the only actor on the international stage (non-­? state actors also important) Integration = process, once started, would undermine the sovereignty of states beyond the expectations of governments Activities of states = outcome of pluralistic political process, in which government decisions are influenced by the interest groups and bureaucratic actors European.

Commission = most important non-­? state international actor, manipulating domestic and international pressures on national governments to advance to process of European integration Mechanisms of the integration o Spillover §? Integration in one sector will cause integration in further sectors, in order to fully enjoy the benefits of the integration of the original sector 1.

Functional spillover • Economies made up of interconnected parts a? impossible to isolate one sector from others • If MS integrated one sector of the economies, the interconnectedness between the sectors will lead to a spillover into other sectors • Integration in one sector will work only if the interconnected sector is also integrated • E. g. : increasing coal production across MS requires brining other forms of energy into the scheme. Otherwise, switch by one MS away from coal towards e. g. oil or nuclear fuel will throw out all the calculations for coal production 2. Political spillover • Building up political pressure in favor of further integration • Once one sector is integrated, lobbying of interest groups occurs at supranational level (the organization in charge of running that sector).

-­? -­? Groups will appreciate the benefits as a result of integration, realizing the barriers preventing these benefits from being fully enjoyed (not integrating other sectors) a? advocating further integration and lobbying the governments • E. g. : ECSC makes the representatives it the coal and steel industry switching the lobby activities (partly) from national governments to the new supranational agency (High Authority) o Technocratic automaticity §? Institutions created will sponsor further integration as they become more powerful and autonomous than member states Assessment of the theory o 1950s: neofunctionalism = winning theory.

Explaining the transition from the ECSC into EC o 1960s: the end of neofunctionalism – Empty Chair Crisis (1965 – 1966) Gaulle’s veto; national governments showing power they are ready to use to determine the nature and pace of integration Aspects to be considered – theory not always applicable o Pluralist social structures §? Member states must be democratic o Substantial economic and industrial development §? A certain level of development – no significant gap among them o Common ideology among participating units §?

No centrally planned economies • Mistakes of neofunctionalism: o Regional integration is not a self-­? contained process, but influence by a wider international context o Governments are uniquely powerful actors as they had formal sovereignty and democratic legitimacy o integration in low politics, not high politics (national security, defense) as states tend to protect their sovereignty (advocated by French in 1950) national government controls the nature and pace of integration in order to protect and promote national interest acknowledges the importance of other actors than governments: o low politics (e. g. social policy):

Interest groups did influence, but were no the only ones – also government officials, parties in office rejects the theory of spillover effects: rejects the idea of common security policy, foreign policy or common armed forces power of supranational institutions increased because governments believed it to be their national interest a? integration only as far as the government allows power to the European Council and Council of Europe Intergovernmentalism – Stanley Hoffman -­? -­? -­? -­? -­? -­? -­? Liberal intergovernmentalism – Andrew Moravcsik -­? -­? national interests = part of a domestic political process, within which economic interests are dominant two-­? level game o demand side §? political elites, lobbyist, interest groups are acting

and forming the demand of the state a? domestic events influence the demands of state interests on the international level o supply side §? interacting of each state with conflicting interests on the level of intergovernmental sessions – Council of Ministers • 1st stage – reach agreement on the common policy • 2nd stage – reach agreement on institutional arrangements supranational institutions reduce transactional costs – more efficient to co-­? exist a? institutions = tools, the main emphasis is on member states that can reduce the power of its supranational bodies Theory applied on negotiation of the Treaties of Rome (1955 – 58), Consolidation of the common market and CAP (1958 – 83), negotiation of SEA (1984 – 88), negotiation of the Treaty on EU (1988 – 91) a? conclusions:

1. Decisions = reflection of the preferences of national governments, not preferences of supranational organizations 2. National preferences = reflection of the balance of economic interests 3. delegating the power to the supranational authority means to ensure the commitments of all parties, not a belief in the inherent efficiency of international organizations -­? -­? Extra Supranational governance – Stone Sweet, Sandholtz -­? -­? EU not one international regimes, but a series of regimes Increased transactions across national borders would create supranational society that favored the creation of supranational rules (more simple for operation)

Multi-­? level governance – Gary Marks -­? -­? -­? -­? -­? rather an approach – EU as a political system with interconnected institutions existing at multiple levels with unique features national government = important decisional role, supranational institutions = autonomic role multilevel actions by multilevel actors (lobbies, companies, parties, states, interest groups) at international, state and regional level a? no superior actor, they are equal many informal relations existing (European norms), that are respected by different actors theory does not address the issue of transferring sovereignty and loyalty.

Constructivism -­? -­? rather an approach advocate of Europeanization, establishing common norms, habits, culture to bring people together – new social community (ministries with European department to synchronize the policies with the ones of the EU) – recognizes multi-­? level governance popular in EU 15 -­? 2) Formation of 3 Communities in the context of economic and political developments in post-­? WWII Europe ECSC – 1952 – Treaty of Paris EEC, EURATOM – 1957 – Treaty of Rome Motives for the formation of the Communities -­? -­? -­? -­?

Reaction to the World Wars: horrifying example (lost lives) a? seeking a peaceful and stable European environment, political and economic cooperation instead of competition Soviet threat: cooperation blocks further Soviet expansion a? Cold war = catalyst for integration of western Europe Political willingness: political cooperation and development replacing economic competition, viewed as a factor in the outbreak of wars o countries seeking cooperation for different reasons §?

Germany, Italy – seeking respectability §? France – seeking security from Germany Economic development: destroyed Europe needed reconstruction o Marshall plan (US interested in Europe) – financing the reconstruction of Europe, establishing what is now known as OECD o Bretton Woods Conference §? 1944, 44 nations to talk about post-­? war economic order §? GATT §? IMF (to regulate the international monetary and financial order a? stable exchange rate) Schuman: French Foreign Minister; plan in collaboration with Jean Monnet Key points o relations between France and Germany needs to be renewed o linking French and German coal and steel industry by placing under control of a supranational body a?

Making war unthinkable and materially impossible (coal and steel = needed to produce armaments, thus capability of waging war) UK no involved in negotiations 1950 Schuman plan -­? -­? -­? ECSC – Treaty of Paris (1951/1952) -­? -­? -­? reduce tariffs by imposing levies on coal and steel production failed to create a single market for coal and steel a? further step needed joined by 6 countries (Benelux, Italy, West Germany) o UK – interest outside Europe -­? o Ireland – tied to UK o Nordic states – cooperation among themselves o Spain, Portugal – dictatorships o Eastern countries under USSR structure: o High Authority (later European Commission by Merger Treaty, chaired by Jean Monnet) =supranational body o Council of Ministers = intergovernmental body o + Assembly,

Court of Justice EEC and EURATOM -­? Treaty of Rome (1957/1958) Catalysts for further integration -­? Spaak report 1955 o Spaak = Belgian Prime Minister o at Messina Intergovernmental Conference – 1955 o key points: §? leading towards EEC: • sector by sector integration is difficult a? • suggests integration of the economy by gradually eliminating trade barriers, to be achieved by creating customs union (EEC) (considers more aspects of the economies for integration) a? • suggests the establishment of an Economic Community §? leading towards EURATOM: • the costs of the nuclear energy sector exceeds financial capacity of individual states a? • supranational level means efficient cost sharing for the development of nuclear energy • why not other energy sector?

o Hydrocarbon energy sources (oil, coal) are managed by multinational companies o Electricity and gas distributed solely at a national level -­? -­? Suez Crisis 1956 o Background: US and UK decided not to finance the construction of the Aswan High Dam as agreed, due to Egyptian ties with communists a? Egypt nationalizes Suez Canal (crucial for trade between Asia, Middle East, Europe, US), imposing tariffs to fund the construction of the dam); a? UK and Fra desired control (colonies, trade purposes). In the meantime, Israel felt hostile towards Egypt as Nasser blocked the Straits of Tiran and supported many raids in Israel a? Israel invaded Egypt a?

UK and France intervened to “enforce cease-­? fire” a? Egypt sinking ships, blocking the passage a? UN forced UK and Fra to back down a? victory of Egypt o Meaning for integration: single European nation-­? state no longer influential as before WWII a? needs integration Algerian war of independence o Algerian gaining independence from France -­? o Meaning for integration: France, no longer a world power, realizes it cannot achieve much by going it alone a? needs integration Soviet suppression of Hungarian Uprising – 1956 o Background: Hungarians opposed the government and Soviet policies a?

Started as student demonstration, where student delegation was detained a? demonstrators outside demanded their release a? violence spread across Hungary a? government fell (Pro-­? Soviet communists executed/imprisoned, former prisoners released) a? Soviets announced willingness to negotiate a withdrawal of Soviet forces, but then changed their mind a? invasion of Budapest by Soviet forces a? new Soviet-­? installed government suppressed the opposition o Meaning for integration:

Soviet control over Central Europe strengthened = increasing threat of communism a? needs integration to form bulwark against further Soviet expansion Creation of the common market o Common tariffs on goods coming from the outside of the community o Removing internal trade restrictions CAP -­? -­? -­? -­? -­? Single market for nuclear power Promote peaceful use of nuclear power Rather for research Selling surplus to other non-­? community countries Mechanism for financing nuclear projects EEC -­? -­? EURATOM 3) Development of European integration 1960s and 1970s 1960s and 1970s – period of stagnation, Eurosclerosis-­?

1962: CAP launched o price support mechanism for farmers o criticism: §? overproduction §? stockpiling of commodities (butter, sugar, wine) §? cost the Community a great deal of money to dispose of §? ill will in the world – 3rd world agricultural products no chance to enter the heavily protected EC market 1965: Merger Treaty o ECSC, EEC and EURATOM into one institutional structure o Creating single Commission, single Council of ministers a? European Communities 1965/1966 Empty Chair Crisis – main brake for integration o reasons: §? Proposed system of own resources for the Communities §? Proposed QMV in the Council of Ministers §?

Proposed budgetary power of Parliamentary Assembly a? policy of non-­? attendance at the Community institutions 1966: Luxembourg Accords/compromise o veto power to the MS, shall the vital national interest be at stake (vital interest not defined) o discussion shall continued until unanimity is reached o starting the period of Eurosclerosis 1968: countries removed internal tariffs on the goods among themselves and applied common external tariffs 1969 Hague Summit: o meeting of heads of government to re-­? launch integration o established European Political Cooperation §? intergovernmental in nature, thus shifting away from supranationalism o reforms disrupted by the economic situation (oil crisis, Middle East wars a? high inflation, stagnation) 1970 and 1975:

Budgetary Treaties o increasing power of the EP 1972: ERM – rate mechanism to keep exchange rates within particular limits a? first idea of single currency 1973: UK, Ireland, Denmark joined EC o UK, Denmark = least federal-­? minded MS = shifting further away from supranationalism 1974: Paris summit -­? -­? -­? -­? -­? -­? -­? -­? -­? -­? -­? o intensify political cooperation – European Council meetings formalized (=strengthening intergovernmentalism, rather than deepening) o Parliament voted directly as of 1978 §?

Not until 1979, due to the difficulties in the UK to prepare the legislation 1978: European Monetary System (EMS) 1979: direct parliamentary election Assessment of the period -­? -­? -­? -­? -­? -­? -­? 1966 – mid-­? 1980s = period of Eurosclerosis stagnation in the decision-­? making process inability to reach unanimity o number of MS doubled by 1986 – harder to reach unanimity o provisions presented many times as the Commission kept making amendments to make them applicable to all MS o Example: Directive 85/384 §?

Harmonizing the training requirements of architects §? Took 17 years to agree and enact goals took long to be achieved lack of representative democracy in the decision-­? making process Common Market not completed as envisaged ECJ – exception o Not affected by the Eurosclerosis o Adopted supranational tone with decisions on direct effects (Van Gend en Loos, Costa vs ENEL) o Building a separate Community legal system, supranational status of the new European legal order 4) Single European Act – analysis in the context of economic and political development, and process of enlargement Birth – influential documents -­? Genscher-­?

Colombo plan o Proposal of the German Foreign Minister + Italian Foreign Minister to extend powers into new areas, including foreign policy, defense and justice, and to revive the role of majority voting o Reflected in the Stuttgart Declaration a? led indirectly to SEA Dooge report: o Irish politician, during Ireland’s Presidency o Drawn up as a preparation for the IGC; recommendations on institutional reform, giving more power to the institutions o Proposal for greater concentration of policy on matters concerning security, cooperation in the armaments sector o Calling for the creation of a permanent Secretariat Cockfield White paper o British Commissioner for Internal Market (under Delors), expected to follow.

Thatcher’s Eurosceptic view, but became a driving force behind the creation of the single market o 300 legislative proposals, demanding a further development of internal market, removing fiscal (indirect taxation), physical (passport control) and technical (law, quotas) barriers Schengen agreement – Benelux + France + Germany – outside treaties and constitutions a? necessary changes can only be undertaken by substantively amending the founding Treaties -­? -­? -­? First Intergovernmental Conference (IGC) 1985 -­? -­? to discuss the decision making of the Council of Ministers, legislative powers of the EP, executive power of the Commission, policy areas of the Community, and the delays before the Court of Justice leading to SEA SEA (1985/1987) -­?

Characteristics o =”a step towards European Union”, catalyst to further integration o 1s significant amendment to the primary Treaties -­? -­? -­? main success: longer-­? term influence in reinvigorating integration extended Community’s competence into new policy areas focused on market liberalization not a radical shift to supranational/federal integration, instead, MS constructed the agenda o driven partly by the enlargements (Greece 1981) – community had to deal with a significantly less developed country, then Spain and Portugal (1987) a? SEA for some legislative reforms in order to reach the goal o goal: o establish single market by 1992 o more effective decision-­? making (QMV instead of unanimity) o changes.

o The Council: reintroduced and extended QMV instead of unanimity regarding internal market (with exception to the issues of taxation, free movement of persons, right and interests of employees) = preparing the ground for the future use of QMV in other areas o Formalized the European Council of Heads of State and Government (originally European Political Cooperation) o Parliament: cooperation procedure in law-­? making a?

Enhanced power, but only in the issues where the Council acts by QMV o Introduced the Court of the First Instance: to cope with the significant increases in the number of cases reaching the Court; except for preliminary rulings, o Social Policies: to deal with various levels of development, many funds (ERDF), common standards in health and safety (under this provision, impact on social policy, e. g. adoption of the Working Time Directive) Further development o UK: Margaret Thatcher §?

Deposed by her own party o Iron Curtain – gone = changing the political situation in Europe a? o German reunification a? political decision-­? making should be integrated, otherwise gains reached for monetary/economic union would be lost, if the political decisions supporting them are still taken independently (=spillover theory, supporting neofunctionalism) o o o o 5) Significance of the Maastricht Treaty (TEU) and creation of the EU -­? analysis in the context of economic and political development, and process of enlargement (1992/1993) shifting from economic to political dimension Background -­? -­? Driven my external events (collapse of the USSR) and internal event (to continue with the success of the SEA) Ratification: o Denmark: rejected in the referendum a?

Opt out options for Denmark at Edinburg Summit 1992 1. Citizenship • The question concerned: referencing only to the national law of the individual possessing the nationality of a MS? 2. Economic and monetary union • not participating in the single currency • not bound by the rules concerning economic policy applied to the MS in the Eurozone • retaining existing powers in the field of monetary policy according to national laws 3. Defense policy • Not participating in the elaboration and the implementation of decisions and actions with defense implications, but not preventing the development of closer cooperation between MS in this area 4.

Justice and home affairs o France §? Only 51% in favor a? confusion a? causing chaos on the currency markets, leading to UK pound’s expulsion from the Exchange Rate Mechanism o UK §? Opt-­? out from the treaty’s social provisions §? Opt-­? out opposed in Parliament by the Labor and Liberal Democrats; treaty opposed by the Maastricht Rebels, causing the governing Conservatives to almost losing the confidence of the House Objectives -­? Strengthen democratic legitimacy, making institutions more effective, CFSP, EMU Introducing -­? -­? -­? -­? -­? -­? 3 pillars /political context/ o 1st – economic, social and environmental issues (=existing Communities) §?

Merging EC, EURATOM and ECSC §? state sharing sovereignty with the EU §? community method: proposal EC, adoption EP and the Council, implementation overseen by Court of Justice nd – CFSP o 2 §? intergovernmental decision-­? making process based on unanimity §? states taking joint actions o 3rd – Justice and home affairs §? immigration, asylum, external borders, police cooperation… Maastricht/Convergence criteria /economic context/ o In order to enter the 3rd stage of European Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) = adopt euro as currency o To maintain price stability within the Eurozone, even with new MS 1. Inflation rate §? No more than 1. 5% points higher than the average of 3 best performing MS of the EU (=MS with lowest inflation).

2. Government finance §? Annual deficit: not exceeding 3%, or at least reaching a level close to 3% §? Debt: not exceeding 60%, or at least approaching the reference value 3. Exchange rate §? Countries join exchange-­? rate mechanism under European Monetary System (EMS) for 2 consecutive years, not devaluing the currency during the period 4. Interest rate §? No more than 2% points higher than 3 lowest inflation member states Copenhagen criteria to join the EU /enlargement context/ o Must be democracy o Human rights and freedoms o Stable institution to enforce law o Able to take on obligation as a member o Market economy EMU /economic context/ o Premises for the introduction of the single currency.

The notion of the European citizenship (benefits – travels, work) Co-­? decision o Nothing else but just a parliamentary veto; no real democratic decision-­? making in the Communities Problems -­? -­? -­? -­? Public not taken on board during negotiation period democratic deficit (EP the only directly elected institution, thus less law-­? making power than the Council TEU = backward step in the deepening integration, as other 2 pillars were intergovernmental in nature (unanimous decision-­? making) Too complex construction of the pillars, mixing intergovernmental and supranational elements 6) Development of the EU after Maastricht Treaty (1993).

More than half of the MS accessed EU after Maastricht Treaty (1995, 2004, 2007) Maastricht Treaty – beyond original economic objective, but did not prepare for further enlargement. After-­? Maastricht -­? -­? -­? -­? -­? 1994 – European Economic Area o allowing Norway and Iceland to join the Single European Market and enjoy the benefits of the Union without having to join the EU (in exchange for financial contributions and taking on of relevant EU law) 1995 Schengen Agreement implemented §? 1996 – EU – Turkey customs union entered into force Finland, Sweden, Austria joined Copenhagen Summit o 1999.

– fraud in the Commission o after the report by the Committee of Independent Experts, Santer Commission resigned – misusing of the funds, poor control over audit, corruption o Parliament would have sacked the Commission had it not resigned by itself (did not approve the budget – put the Commission into the crisis) o Changing the relationship between the EP and EC – EC started as the powerful, now EP gaining the power – not sure which supranational institution is more powerful o Commission weakened, EP gaining the publicity, operating with a grater government-­? opposition dynamic weaknesses o fraud in Commission a?

Resignation a? euroscepticism o major issues remained unsolved – democratic deficit, CAP, governance style o subject of national sovereignty, controversial nature of the integration o remaining questions §? how far to extend QMV §? how to reduce the number of commissioners after the enlargement §? hot to re-­? allocate the votes in the Council to reflect the populations of the MS Copenhagen criteria to join the EU – slowly progressing towards enlargement, including Eastern Europe o Must be an European state o Must respect liberty, freedoms, rule of law -­?

o Must have stable institutions to guarantee democracy, human rights, rule of law o Must have a functioning market economy o Must be able to cop with the obligations of the MS – political, economic, monetary Multi-­? speed Europe concept o Some members participate in all areas o Option to opt-­? out (Schengen area – UK) Amsterdam Treaty – signed 1997, force 1999 -­? -­? -­? Background o IGC to agree on the conclusion of the Treaty o Countries with own agendas: UK seeking to reopen previous Treaties, limit the powers of the Court, making the IGC dragged on until Labour Party won the May 1997 election in the UK, with the new government having less objections Obj.