Fifty years ago, the heads of state and of government of six West European countries met on the Capitoline Hill, in Rome, to put their names to the founding act of the European Communities, widely known as the Treaty of Rome. Little could they have known at that point that over the subsequent five decades no fewer than 21 of their neighbouring countries would also choose to "join the club", bringing the total number of members to 27.
A series of festivities marking the 50th anniversary - concerts, conferences, football matches, festivals - will be organised across Europe on and around the date on which the official signing ceremony took place. The celebrations will culminate this weekend, when European leaders will gather in the German capital to present the Berlin Declaration, setting out their vision for the next 50 years of European integration. In Rome, some 200 young people will debate the future of the EU at a groundbreaking youth summit.
Our 50th anniversary is a time to celebrate past achievements and to build on those achievements for the benefit of a new generation of Europeans. However, as with any anniversary, it should be a time for reflection as much as a time for celebration. As the EU grows older and new challenges arise, priorities change. Indeed, the rationale for European integration itself changes. It is entirely normal, therefore, that future generations will have a different conception of Europe than that of its founding fathers.
Having experienced the appalling experience of the world war, Jean Monnet, Robert Schuman and their ilk, saw European integration as a way of escaping the seeming inevitability of a new war. That is a robust argument and one that still has currency, in a continent which has been for centuries the theatre of wars and where peace has not always been the rule, including in recent times, outside the European Union. However, we should not take this argument for granted.
We need to come up with equally powerful arguments for the Europeans of tomorrow. Oxford Professor Timothy Garton Ash recently wrote that Europe is 27 member states in search of a new story. Indeed, I believe the EU does have a story, it does have an identity, but it is true that these have become a little ill-defined of late. The EU is "on the move", but we need to reflect on where exactly its should be moving.
Europe is and always has been a "Europe of results". The EU has brought freedom, peace and prosperity to half a billion people. Barely 50 years on from the last world war, Europe has reached a state of peaceful coexistence and the continent is no longer artificially divided between east and west.
The enlargement of Europe to include 27 countries underlines the strength of the European values and the lessons we have drawn from history. We have a single market, a common currency shared by 13 member states, and we are one of the biggest trading powers in the world. With its unique brand of "soft" power, the European Union commands great respect in the international arena and is able to exercise decisive influence on world events.
The European Union has meant a better quality of life, work and education. We have created a "European way", not American, Russian or Chinese way: a social market economy with an overall objective ofand sustainable development, showing that economic growth can be combined with social security and environmental protection. But Europe is not just a market place.
It has brought the gender equality, anti-discrimination policies and unprecedented protection of human and civil rights. In short, for many Europeans, the Union has meant hope and opportunity.
These achievements are all well and good, far better, in fact, than any of the founding fathers could ever have imagined, but they are not enough to dispel the feeling in some quarters that the EU is running out of steam. This impression is, of course, partly due to the impasse regarding the draft constitutional treaty, which would give the EU a more identifiable presence on the international stage, a more streamlined decision-making process and more transparent procedures, thereby enabling European citizens to have greater oversight over "their" EU.
The EU has done and continues to do a lot on the basis of the existing treaties that were last revisited at Nice in the year 2000. Critics point out that this is a fantastic argument against the Constitution. As the saying goes, if it ain't broke don't fix it. That is a very lazy argument. The point is that the EU could work a whole lot better. The institutional arrangements hammered out at Nice are no longer satisfactory. To use an analogy, the way the EU currently functions is tantamount to a very large person trying to fit into very tight clothes.
In a globalised world, the member states have everything to gain from pooling their resources. It is clear that 27 member states all pulling together are far better equipped to face the considerable challenges of the 21st century - new threats related to the upsurge in global terrorism, securing safe energy supplies, state-building, conflict resolution - but they need the institutional wherewithal to do it. Further enlargement is also contingent on this.
Europe deserves a second chance. One thing it certainly doesn't deserve is a second failure. If we fail again, Europe will become a two-speed Europe, a multi-speed Europe. The Union will lose its soul, its fragile identity will not survive. The 2007, when we celebrate the achievements of the past 50 years and look to the next 50 years, is a great year to find a solution to the constitutional impasse. But we have to show that we have listened - that is why the focus must be on innovative elements in the new treaty: to respond to challenges such as climate change, energy security, immigration. We should also strive to maintain the main innovations bringing more transparency and accountability of the EU to citizens - citizens initiative, the subsidiarity test for the national parliaments. Last but not least, we should introduce the new democratic right for European citizens - the right to be informed and have a say..
So what is the vision for the next 50 years? The European dimension will become increasingly essential as time goes by. The 21st century holds many challenges; we can more effectively face those challenges together. The Berlin Declaration will deliver a political statement about the Europe we want for the next half century that is both ambitious and realistic.
The major challenge currently facing us is the need to equip Europeans for globalisation. Globalisation has winners and losers. This is something of a cliché perhaps, but true nonetheless. To be successful in a global economy and to achieve the growth rates necessary to sustain current living standards, Europe must do more to harness its creative power and ability to convert knowledge into high-quality products, services and new business models for which there is strong global demand. But Europe should also protect its citizens against the negative effects of globalisation and should not leave its people behind. To my mind, solidarity and inclusiveness are also core European values and ones that it would be fitting to give prominence to in the coming years.
Energy security and energy efficiency will be at the very top of the EU's agenda throughout 2007. Rising oil and gas prices, the EU's increasing dependency on a few external suppliers and the threat of climate change can and will affect the everyday lives of European citizens. And it is impossible to tackle any of these challenges at national level alone. They all point to the need for a forward-looking European energy policy.
A number of excellent EU volunteering schemes already exist to harness the enormous potential that is out there. These include the European Voluntary Service (EVS), which has been run by the European Commission since 1996 and which is targeted at young people between the ages of 18-25, and European Voluntary Humanitarian Aid Corps, whose members provide invaluable humanitarian assistance to third countries in need. Nonetheless, despite the sterling work carried out by organisations such as these, I believe that the full potential of the European volunteering sector remains largely untapped.
No matter how effective the EU is, no matter how important institutions and the "European dimension" are, it will be difficult to convince European citizens of this if we fail to properly engage with them. The era of elite-driven integration is past. A Europe built on its citizens is a Europe with solid foundations. Europe is a democratic project, which requires the active involvement of its citizens, through the participation to the European elections, through the recourse to other instruments of participation, the citizens should make their voices heard.
A number of excellent EU volunteering schemes already exist to harness the enormous potential that is out there. These include the European Voluntary Service (EVS), which has been run by the European Commission since 1996 and which is targeted at young people between the ages of 18-25, and European Voluntary Humanitarian Aid Corps, whose members provide invaluable humanitarian assistance to third countries in need. Nonetheless, despite the sterling work carried out by organisations such as these, I believe that the full potential of the European volunteering sector remains largely untapped. I dream of a big "European Solidarity Corps".
The European motor hasn't broken down, but it certainly isn't working at full throttle. As long as the EU is functioning less democratically and less efficiently than it could be, our efforts to deliver the policies our citizens expect will never be wholly convincing. We cannot build tomorrow's Europe with yesterday's tools.
Ms Wallström is vice president of European Commission responsible for institutional relations and communication strategy.