Complexity of European Integration Essay Example

topic, I have thoroughly examined R. Cooper's monograph on The Post-modern State and World Order, J. McCormick's book Understanding the European Union, and selected chapters from a European Union textbook written by E. [1]

The text mentions the authors Bomberg and A. Stubb and their contribution to a book on the European Union enlargement authored by N. Nugent. This book includes speeches, declarations, and articles by influential European politicians. These materials are published within B. Nelson and A. Stubbs' Readings on the Theory and Practice of European Integration.

Moreover, the EU's official website has been instrumental in helping to comprehend the historical progression of European integration. Throughout Europe's history, there have been numerous uncertainties and disputes related to economics, culture, politics, society, boundaries, and ethnic or religious associations.

According to J. McCormick, Europe is making progress in economic, social, and political integration but its definition remains unclear. This is because the European Union member states lack cultural homogeneity and there is no European race. Additionally, the constant change of territorial boundaries has led to national minorities in every European state, including the Basques and Irish who are separated by national borders.

Over the past forty years, several states have seen significant increases in their immigrant populations. For example, France has experienced a large influx of Algerians, Germany has witnessed an increase in Turks, and Indians have migrated to Britain. A notable observation is that these countries lack a dominant culture. Europeans understandably worry about losing their distinct identities to a homogenized Euroculture.[2] Language plays a crucial role in shaping national identity as it determines how widely certain languages are spoken and used for integration purposes. In relation to the

concept of Europe, J explores this notion.

According to McCormick, there are several factors regarding multilingualism in the EU. One factor is that residents of the EU speak at least 36 languages, which serve as symbols of national identity and remind Europeans of their differences. In contrast, the United States benefited from having a common language. Despite this diversity, EU documents are translated into the 11 official languages of member states, although English and French are increasingly used within EU institutions. The dominance of English is growing due to its widespread use in global commerce and diplomacy, causing concern among the French and other Europeans. However, it is likely to be unstoppable and could potentially help bridge cultural differences among Europeans. Additionally, larger EU states like the UK, France, and Germany constantly strive to protect their interests and influence European processes.

J. McCormick discusses the uncertainty surrounding Europe's definition and boundaries. While other continents are defined by their coastlines, Europe is delineated by the Atlantic, Arctic, and Mediterranean on its western, northern, and southern sides. However, Europe does not have a clear eastern boundary and is technically considered part of Asia. Despite this technicality, Europe has been regarded as distinct from Asia for centuries, although there is disagreement regarding the exact demarcation between them. Moreover, in the Slavic portion of Europe, a unique situation arises where there is a shared language base but "lands between" emerge due to shifts in power dynamics. This particular region becomes entangled in great-power competition and is commonly known as the "lands between".

According to Delanty (1995 p. 54), the Slavic people became divided into different religious groups, including Catholicism, Greek Orthodoxy, and

Islam. As a result, there was cultural diversity in this region despite its location in western Europe. The western countries saw this area as a buffer against Russia since there were no lasting states associated with dominant ethnic groups. Throughout the Cold War, the ideological divisions between east and west highlighted the distinctiveness of eastern Europe, even though historical ties indicated that Poland was geographically closer to western Europe than to Russia. [5] II. 2.

Discussing the idea of Europe, J. McCormick highlights that Europeans have shared similarities, but also significant differences. These differences include a lack of common history, diverse languages, varying social values, differing perspectives on their place in the world, and a long history of conflict and changing allegiances. Additionally, Europe has frequently redrawn its borders due to shifts in political affiliations. Throughout history, the international order in Europe has relied on either hegemony from powerful empires or balance through small states. In fact, Europe was the birthplace of the balance-of-power model.

Despite its imperfections, the coalitions were effectively curbing the ambitions of larger states seeking to dominate Europe. This system also gained legitimacy as statesmen recognized the importance of maintaining a balance. Over time, there was a consensus that the diversity of European states should be preserved, with some viewing this as essential for liberty in Europe. However, the balance-of-power system had its own instability, always on the verge of sparking a war.

[7] The Cold War is a distinct phase of European integration where two concepts, two completely different political blocs engage in combat through ideological propaganda rather than military actions. They primarily fight over new areas of interference and hide behind

threats of nuclear weapons. ‘ Since the Cold War was a battle of ideas as much as a battle between armies, these changes were not forced upon governments by occupying forces but were instead introduced through the efforts of MIT-trained economists, management consultants, seminars, and technical assistance programs. The unique nature of the Cold War is also evident in the fact that instead of demanding reparations – a practice that endured from the Middle Ages to the 20th century – we provided aid to assist in the conversion of the defeated side. This highlights how wars of ideas differ from wars over territory.’ [8] II.

3. The process of European integration has faced multiple interruptions and pauses, particularly during the late 1960s and 1970s. These setbacks were primarily caused by Charles de Gaulle's actions. De Gaulle's arrival had mixed effects on the formation of the emerging European Community as he openly opposed supranationalism.

He and his Gaulist supporters resisted the ECSC and the EDC, but accepted the EC for its economic potential. According to de Gaulle, the nation state was supreme and alliances could only be formed on intergovernmental grounds with shared sovereignty. However, de Gaulle believed that the Community could politically serve as a basis for an intergovernmental organization of European states. This collision between supranationalism and intergovernmentalism has resulted in the first crisis in EU history: majority voting is a key instrument of supranationalism, as member states on the losing side are required to abide by the majority's decision.

De Gaulle opposed the idea of Qualified Majority Voting (QMV) because he believed it would undermine national sovereignty. This disagreement led to the 'Empty Chair Crisis'

in June 1965, where French representation in the Council was withdrawn. Although de Gaulle claimed it was in protest of Commission proposals to strengthen the EC's budgetary powers, it was also an attempt to pressure other member states into not extending the use of QMV. De Gaulle's primary motive for resisting QMV was to protect the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) from a coalition of liberal member states. This crisis eventually ended in January 1966 with the 'Luxembourg Compromise', marking a compromise in EU history.

The Treaty’s provisions on Qualified Majority Voting (QMV) would remain in place, however, the Council would abstain from voting if a member state argued that highly important interests were at stake. The Luxembourg Compromise shifted the balance towards intergovernmentalism in the Community’s decision-making process, with unanimity becoming the standard approach. This had a negative impact on decision-making until the Single European Act came into effect in 1987. [11] The EU has consistently faced tensions between distinct national interests and shared economic interdependence, which have become a daily occurrence on the domestic agenda. Nonetheless, a series of revisions to the EU’s Treaties, occurring four times in 15 years following the mid-1980s, had the overall effect of uniting the Union’s member states more closely, reinforcing its common institutions, and expanding its policy jurisdiction. II.

4. Multiculturalism in Europe appears to be failing, as leaders across the continent denounce the policy. French President Nicolas Sarkozy recently expressed his disapproval of public prayer in a conspicuous manner. German Chancellor Angela Merkel initially initiated this movement, declaring that the concept of simply coexisting happily together without integration has proven unsuccessful.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel acknowledged the failure by

stating, "Utterly failed."[12] Former British Prime Minister David Cameron also admitted the failure, remarking, " We have failed to provide a vision of society to which they feel they want to belong. We have even tolerated these segregated communities behaving in ways that run counter to our values."[13] The most definitive response came from French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who unequivocally stated, "My answer is, clearly, yes, it's a failure."

’[14] According to immigration officer Arnold Mengelkoch from Copenhagen, multiculturalism can only be successful if immigrants have employment, financial independence, and a sense of responsibility towards the community. Without these factors, immigrants may become unemployed individuals who rely on social welfare and lead passive lives. [15] The main problem lies in the varying interpretations of integration and multiculturalism among both locals and immigrants. Gassan Khorani, a Danish immigrant and civil engineer, explains that immigrants and natives have different perspectives on the concept of integration.

'The Danes believe that integration entails adopting complete Danish culture. Immigrants are expected to adopt the Danish way of eating, drinking, and living. However, those who come here believe that integration simply involves earning money, ensuring that their children speak Danish, and attending Danish schools. This difference in viewpoints is the source of discord,' [16] he states. Fiorello Provera, a Member of the European Parliament and the EU parliament's vice-chair of foreign affairs, asserts that Italy also confronts the same multicultural problem as most immigrants are reluctant to comply with the country's regulations.

According to the speaker, multicultural tolerance requires all individuals to abide by the same rules and laws. He explains that in Italy, immigrants are tolerated if they adhere to the rules, laws,

and traditions. It is relatively easy to accept and tolerate immigrants who follow these regulations. However, if they choose to live by their own set of rules within our territory, it becomes much more challenging for the Italian people to accept. It is possible that until this discrepancy in expectations is resolved, cultural tensions in Europe will persist. Acknowledging the existence of this problem may be the initial step towards finding a solution, as it appears that the heads of state have only recently recognized what many observers have long been predicting.

Currently, the issue is more pressing than before, with the uprising in Northern Africa causing a surge of immigrants flocking to the EU. However, the Old World is not welcoming them with open arms. Moreover, the process of European Integration is an unfinished and constantly evolving process that is primarily driven by economic factors.

The positive effect of integration on prosperity is well-documented in economic theory. Additionally, integration can help reduce conflicts by promoting common economic interests. The process of European integration started with the European Coal and Steel Community in the 1950s and has progressively advanced to the establishment of the Single Market and the implementation of the euro across Europe. The euro represents the final component of the Single Market. If the euro is not introduced, the entire integration process and its accomplishments thus far could be jeopardized.

However, the process of integration will not be completed with the introduction of the euro. Nevertheless, the process of European Integration will continue because many countries are still willing to join the EU. The introduction of the euro is the final stage of the integration process,

which should not be rushed. First, these countries must successfully integrate their economies into the EU environment. Afterwards, participation in the new exchange rate mechanism is inevitable. 'The new members will all join EMU at some point, but it could be several years after accession before they become part of the eurozone. They have not been given the option of an opt-out from the euro like those negotiated by the UK and Denmark. However, this is not a problem as most of the new member states want to join the eurozone as quickly as possible after accession, and they nearly all have some form of peg to the euro in place.'

The eurozone is seen as removing exchange rate risk and further boosting trade with other eurozone members. It would also result in lower interest rates, encouraging investment and growth. The written paper emphasizes the relevance of European Integration and presents five arguments supporting the main thesis on the complexity of the integration process. The first argument discusses the disputed territorial lines of Europe and its lack of homogeneity. It also evaluates the success of the integration process and addresses national identity issues, which are influenced by the homogenized Euroculture model dominated by the English language. The second argument focuses on the legacy of wars in Europe, the role of small states, and the underlying motivations behind the Cold War.

The third point examines the European Integration's ups and downs over the years, focusing on Charles de Gaulle's attempts to disrupt the process and the subsequent resolution through The Luxembourg Compromise. The fourth argument highlights the failure of the multiculturalism model across Europe, as acknowledged by various

leaders of European states, and calls for new alternatives. The fifth argument emphasizes the ongoing nature of the integration process and identifies future challenges, including the introduction of the euro as a common currency. Overall, while some still view the EU as a threat to national identities, it is predominantly seen as offering economic and security benefits for individuals and countries, which ultimately take precedence. IV.

References: Bomberg, E. Stubb, A. (2003) The European Union: How does it work? , Dinan, D. , How Did We Get Here? Chapter 2, p.

114-115 Bomberg, E., Stubb, A. (2003) The European Union: How does it work?, Dinan, D., How Did We Get Here? Chapter 2, p.

115 Bomberg, E., Stubb, A. (2003) The European Union: How does it work?, Dinan, D., How Did We Get Here? Chapter 2, p. 115 Cooper, R. (2000) The Post-modern State and World Order.

Demos, p. 11 Cooper, R. (2000) The Post-modern State and World Order. Demos, p. 14 Grabbe, H. What the new member states bring into the European Union, Chapter 5, p.

8 McCormick J. (2002) Understanding the European Union, p. 28

29 McCormick J. (2002) Understanding the European Union, p. 38

39 McCormick J. (2002) Understanding the European Union, p. 39 McCormick J. (2002) Understanding the European Union, p. 40 http://www.japantoday.

com/category/world/view/merkel-german-multiculturalism-has-utterly-failed

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12371994

http://news.yahoo.

Here are some links related to the topic:
http://wn.com/multikulti_failblog_europe_leaders_trash_multicultralism
http://wn.com/multikulti_failblog_europe_leaders_trash_multicultralism

References:
[1] McCormick J. (2002) Understanding the European Union, p. 28
[2] McCormick J. (2002) Understanding the European Union, p.

38 [3] McCormick J. (2002) Understanding the European Union, p. 39 [4] McCormick J. (2002) Understanding the European Union, p. 39 [5] McCormick J. (2002) Understanding the European Union, p.

0 [6] McCormick J.

(2002) Understanding the European Union, p. 29 [7] Cooper, R. (2000) The Post-modern State and World Order. Demos, p. 11 [8] Cooper, R.

The text "

(2000) The Post-modern State and World Order. Demos, p. 14 [9] Bomberg, E., Stubb, A.

" remains the same as it is already unified and does not require .

(2003) The European Union: How does it work?, Dinan, D., How Did We Get Here? Chapter 2, p. 114-115 [10] Bomberg, E., Stubb, A.

(2003) The European Union: How does it work?, Dinan, D., How Did We Get Here? Chapter 2, p. 115 [11] Bomberg, E., Stubb, A.

(2003) The European Union: How does it work? Dinan, D., How Did We Get Here? Chapter 2, p. 115 [12] http://www.japantoday.com/category/world/view/merkel-german-multiculturalism-has-utterly-failed [13] http://www.bbc.

The text contains and their respective contents. It includes links to three different websites: "co.uk/news/uk-politics-12371994 [14]", "http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20110210/wl_afp/francepoliticsimmigrationsociety_20110210231042 [15]", and "http://wn."

com/multikulti_failblog_europe_leaders_trash_multiculturalism [16] http://wn. com/multikulti_failblog_europe_leaders_trash_multiculturalism [17] Grabbe, H. What the new member states bring into the European Union, Chapter 5, p. 98