Headlines in the past few months have made frequent references to the word crisis. There is a risk that, after using this word for a while, its meaning may be somewhat diluted. Nonetheless, there is no better word to describe the persistent state of uncertainty and insecurity which grips the continent.
In medical jargon, a crisis denotes a pivotal point in a patient’s condition; the ailing patient may either recover or die. The same can be said for the European Union. In this case, death would be slower and more painful while its aftermath would initially be devastating. The dynamics of the international system would change and a vacuum of power is likely to be created.
It is a death which can easily be prevented, save for one small problem; Europe lacks much needed decisive, inspiring and visionary leadership. These crises have exposed a divided and fractious Union, which, rather than being ‘united in diversity’, finds itself warring in adversity.
The refugee crisis has seen migrants leaving Syria and striving to reach Germany in the hope of a better life. The photo of Aylan Kurdi was a poignant reminder of the humanitarian tragedy unfolding on the periphery of Europe. This was preceded by news that some 1,500 migrants from Sub-Saharan Africa had drowned or are missing in the central Mediterranean.
The idea of European integration is often articulated in utopic and academic terms and may be far removed from the aspirations of individual citizens
This humanitarian tragedy has repercussions on a political, economic, social and security level. It is undoubtedly one of the most emotive and divisive issues facing contemporary Europe. At EU-level there are bitter disagreements over this crisis. There is only one point of convergence; all countries seem to view this as a problem to be tackled. However, solutions seem to be elusive.
The threat of an immediate Grexit – a complete Greek withdrawal from the Eurozone – also plunged the Eurozone and the EU into panic mode.
Divisions among EU leaders could also be observed in their inability to reach agreement over a common response to Russia’s actions in the Ukraine. The EU has since struggled to maintain a unified front over this issue with some leaders openly praising Vladimir Putin. In terms of foreign policy, EU countries are also divided over the recognition of Kosovo as an independent state.
In a fit of anger French President François Hollande expressed his dismay at the behaviour of some EU leaders. He stressed that those who do not share the EU’s values “need to start asking themselves questions about their place in the European Union”. Such an attitude is likely to antagonise, rather than build bridges.
The electoral success of a number of populist Eurosceptic parties poses another threat to the EU. The recent success in the polls of Poland’s Law and Justice Party will likely lead to a change in the tone of relations between Brussels and Warsaw. Their victory follows trends throughout Europe.
Within the European Parliament, UKIP is the largest political grouping from the UK. Front Nationale is the largest grouping from France and its success has greatly shaken the political establishment.
The Eurosceptic Danish People’s Party in Denmark made significant inroads and is now part of the governing coalition. As part of the coalition agreement, it set four conditions including that of adopting a more Eurosceptic approach toward the EU, the introduction of border controls and restrictions on Denmark’s asylum policy.
In a sobering keynote speech in Madrid, EU Commission President Jean Claude Junker acknowledged that “the EU is not going very well... and so we must ensure that we keep alive the ambitions, hopes and dreams of Europe”.
And he told the European People’s Party that politicians must appeal to those who always supported Europe and “reconquer their heart”.
Whether the current cohort of leaders can achieve this is highly debatable. In an interview for a BBC documentary, the late Margaret Thatcher described some European leaders as being “weak” and “feeble”; the same could be said about a number of leaders in Europe today.
The idea of European integration is often articulated in utopic and academic terms and may be far removed from the aspirations of individual citizens. Moreover, whilst the EU is officially promoting further European integration, the actions of EU leaders and the lack of agreement seem to point to an eventual failure of this integration project.
Leadership is often mistaken to be a synonym for decision-making. However, there is a great distinction between one and the other; a leader must go beyond taking short-term decisions.
Leadership also depends on the strength of a political vision; the capacity to formulate and articulate a vision for individuals and society and the ability to mobilise people to accept this vision and work towards achieving it.
An old Jewish proverb best captures the importance of this: “Where there is no vision, the people perish.”
This is the risk the EU faces. When confronted with an unreceptive and often hostile electorate, leadership will be crucial if the EU is going to reverse its current decline and become more responsive and relevant to individual citizens.
André DeBattista holds a Masters of Arts in international relations.