European Affairs

Spring 2003

 

European Integration
The Time Has Come for a Politically Unified Europe
By Antonio Puri Purini

 

Approaches to the future of Europe can be very different: the majority of Europeansdraw pride from the progress that has characterized European integration; othersfeel that the results achieved so far have been disappointing and that Europeshould be content with its present achievements, which are mainly economic. Somenever wanted much more than economic cooperation in the first place.

Italy believes that Europe must evolve into a political entity (but not a “super-state”)for the benefit of its citizens and for the stability of the world. In spite ofdifferent but, as time goes by, less conflicting national priorities, every Europeancountry knows that Europe has become our common destiny. There is no future forEuropean countries, no matter how diversified our traditions and our perceptions,unless European integration is successful.

A positive outcome of Europe’s efforts to define its identity on the basisof an open debate, which is the essence of democracy, would be in the long-terminterests of the United States. It is important for our American friends to understandthat a strong European presence in the world can only bring advantages to theUnited States.

Let me be clear on this point: democracy, freedom, human rights and the marketeconomy can only prevail in the world on the basis of a steady and long-term effortby North America and Europe. International crime, money laundering, and drug traffickingcan be fought effectively only on the basis of such a joint commitment. The alleviationof world poverty also requires a joint U.S.–European effort, not to mentionthe environment and other transnational issues which can be dealt with effectivelyonly by countries that share beliefs and values.

Americans know a great deal about Europe, although they may be less familiar withits institutions. In areas such as trade and competition, Americans may have haddirect contact with the European Commission, which has full responsibility forthese sectors. In general, however, Americans are often frustrated by the varietyof EU interlocutors and procedures, as well as by the Union’s habit of rotatingits Presidency every six months. Americans also have trouble coping with the complexitiesof the whole process of integration. These difficulties are understandable, atleast to a certain extent.

In practical terms, however, every American traveling to Europe may observe twomajor developments that would have been unthinkable only a few years ago: first,the abolition (and shortly the removal of the physical manifestations) of bordersbetween most countries belonging to the European Union; and second, the adoptionof the euro as a single currency by 12 of the 15 member states. The euro is thefirst currency to have severed links with the nation state.

There is no going back on these developments, and it would be a mistake to playdown the achievements they represent. We do not expect blind endorsement fromAmericans, but a fair understanding of what has been accomplished.

Both the abolition of borders and the relinquishment of national sovereignty overthe currency are remarkable events that have too often been taken for granted.They would never have happened without the continuing strength of the Europeanideal and the continuity of policies carried out by European Governments witha great deal of commitment over many years.

Much more is on the way: the negotiations on the accession of ten new member statesto the European Union have been completed; the historic reunification of Europeis accomplished; almost 500 million citizens of 25 European countries will takepart in elections to the European Parliament in the spring of 2004; the Conventionon the Future of Europe is making significant progress on the adoption of a commonconstitutional treaty. It is likely that by the end of this year the EuropeanUnion will have agreed on a European constitution, and thereby created renewedinstitutions capable of enhancing the effectiveness of the Union and its rolein the international community.

Enormous progress has been made since the end of the 1940s, when the EuropeanUnion’s Founding Fathers conceived a project aimed at creating a long-termunion among Europeans. This progress is the best response to current waves ofEuro-pessimism or Euro-skepticism.

Three major forces have made such remarkable progress possible: faith in the Europeanideal, the determination of Europeans to take responsibility for their futureand recognition that European integration is in the best interests of every memberstate. Looking back at the recent, difficult enlargement negotiations and the introductionof the euro, I feel that both results have been achieved because European integrationhas acquired a dominant position in the political life of every European country.

Ideals and a sense of responsibility have motivated different generations of Europeanpolitical leaders over the decades: time has shown that the only possible futurefor Europe is to build on tangible achievements based on enhanced solidarity.There is now a widespread consensus that further unification should, and can, becomea reality. Although the European countries are highly individual in many respects,their citizens nevertheless share common interests and opinions, and go abouttheir lives in very similar ways.

The driving force behind European integration has been widespread awareness ofthe need for a constructive balance between intergovernmental cooperation andshared European sovereignty. This balance should not be upset. We have gottenthis far only because the balance between these two principles has been maintainedand because it has proved compatible with the interests of all the member States.

In order to function equally well in the future, the balance must be adjustedby giving greater weight to shared sovereignty. In important ways, such as theadoption of the euro and the move to economic and monetary union, this is alreadyhappening.

Nevertheless, many obstacles remain to be overcome: we have no idea how a Unionof 25 states can be made to work and we are investing a great deal of energy intrying to solve the problem. Under no circumstances can we afford to envisagefailure as a possible option.

It will not be easy to involve the new Central and Eastern European members inthe process of integration or to improve decision making among 25 countries. Butit is clear that operational and decision-making capacities will have to be radicallyreformed: the sooner such changes are made, the better it will be for the effectivenessof the European Union.

The Convention on the Future of Europe has the historic responsibility of definingthe role of Europe in the 21st century and of creating a genuine political community.The work of the Convention so far suggests that we are on the right track towardproviding the European Union with strong and effective institutions, based onthe principle of majority voting.

The European Union is now at a crossroads. We face crucial choices over whetherto cede further national sovereignty to the central institutions, creating a kindof European sovereignty, or to maintain the distinct authority of national governments.On the one hand, there is the possibility that Europe will move toward becominglittle more than a single market, with loose institutions and cooperation basedmainly on the goodwill of national governments; on the other, the possibilitythat it will evolve into a real Union, capable of defending its values and itsinterests, and looking beyond the national horizons of member states.

The first choice would pave the way for a sort of Commonwealth of Nations; it wouldrun counter to the history of the past half-century. The experience of politicalinstitutions based on intergovernmental cooperation is not very reassuring, whereascommon institutions provide the framework for defining common interests and formaking sound decisions. Jean Monnet, one of the Founding Fathers, used to saythat institutions stay while people come and go.

Furthermore, only a supranational model will provide an answer to a problem thathas long been a source of American frustration: the difficulty of knowing who speaksfor Europe.

If the negotiations on a European constitution are complete by the end of 2003,Europe will be able to acquire an international legal personality. At that point,the identity of the European Union will have taken an important step forward:it will not only have a flag, an anthem, and a currency but also a constitution.It will become an integrated political union; the balance between national sovereigntyand European sovereignty will have shifted permanently in favor of the latter.

In other words, Europe is not an international organization or an alliance ofnations. Europe is taking steps toward acquiring statehood: it is not there yet,which explains the trouble Europeans have defining the borders of Europe, but suchan outcome is within reach.

To achieve such a lofty purpose we need a visible European executive that is capableof taking the initiative and coordinating the actions of the national Governments.European statehood must be based on balancing the three key institutions of theUnion: the Council as the political engine, the Commission as the guarantor ofthe treaties, and the European Parliament.

The task, however, is far from complete. In order to speak with one voice in theworld, the European Union needs a common approach in areas that are crucial toits credibility: foreign policy, defense and the economic governance of the eurozone.

These problems should be solved quickly and with political vision. As a first step,we need clearly defined principles and objectives; as a second step, we need commonpolicies decided by the Council and implemented by a European Foreign Minister;as a third step we shall need a common European foreign policy.

Foreign policy is a test case, especially in relations with the United States.The European Union’s failure to develop a common foreign policy is one ofthe shortcomings that prevent the Union from narrowing the gap between its hugeeconomic potential and its limited political capacity. We are well aware thata great deal of effort is still needed to add flesh to the bare bones of a commonEuropean foreign policy.

Furthermore, we cannot live for long with an imbalance between a centralized monetarysystem and more diffuse economic governance. Although we draw great satisfactionfrom having a federal monetary government, embodied in the European Central Bank,common monetary policies must be supplemented by tighter economic coordination– as a first step toward joint economic policies.

It is essential that a group of countries highly committed to European integrationshould now become an engine of further unification. Such a group could be composedof the six founding members of the European Communities: they have been the buildersof the main pillars that sustain the European architecture; they include largeand small countries; they are bound by common historic memories and their experiencein constructing a united Europe remains unique.

The founding nations – Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg and theNetherlands – are still members of a special club. But it is not a closedclub. It is open to other similarly motivated countries that do not want the drivefor further integration to be delayed by those who prefer a slower pace.

This is not the first time that Europeans have had had to tackle serious and unprecedentedpolitical difficulties. Each time, such problems have been resolved by furtherexpanding the horizons of integration.

As for Italy, it knows its place in the world and the areas in which it can operateeffectively. It has consistently played an active and judicious role in Europe,a role that has enjoyed strong bipartisan support at home. Italy has always beenamong the most dynamic and constructive forces driving European integration.

Italy will hold the Presidency of the European Union in the second half of 2003,and will make every effort to ensure that the constitutional process is not delayedby external events, as some are now predicting. Any delay could mean a seriousloss of momentum. As President, Italy will strive to make a significant contributionto the integration of Europe, hopefully by finalizing a Constitutional Treaty thatwill define the functioning and identity of the European Union for years to come.

Antonio Puri Purini has been Diplomatic Adviser to the President of the Italian Republic since 1999. Before that, he was Permanent Representative of Italy to the Council of Europe. During his long career in the Italian Foreign Service, Ambassador Puri Purini has held a number of posts in Rome, in the Directorate of Political Affairs and the Cabinet of the Foreign Affairs Minister, and abroad. Most recently, he was Deputy Chief of Mission in Washington, D.C.