The European Union is still shaken by the result of the Brexit vote. The recent summit held in Bratislava aimed to map out a possible way forward for the EU.
Perhaps, rather than producing a road map, the summit served to assuage many of the fears of both EU officials and national governments. Drafting a road map for the future is always a tricky task; institutions are fluid and too much rigidity can lead to atrophy. However, some form of direction is also necessary.
In Bratislava, the EU leaders met to discuss possible common grounds for unity and integration. However, at present, unity within the EU is conspicuous by its absence. Separate factions seem to be forming which leads one to think that the dreaded ‘two-tier’ EU is more of an unacknowledged reality rather than a possible future scenario.
The factions in Europe can be loosely categorised into five clusters: the founding members, the Visegrad group, the Mediterranean group, the Scandinavian group and the peripheral countries.
In August, French President Francois Hollande, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi met in Ventotene to pay tribute to the memory of Altiero Spinelli. Spinelli, a prominent Italian left-winger, was one of the co-authors of a manifesto which advocated European federalism.
The significance of this meeting is not to be understated. The three heads of government informally discussed the future of Europe. All three leaders face crucial electoral tests in the coming year.
Hollande is deeply unpopular, and his chances of re-election seem slim. Merkel’s party is enduring successive humiliating defeats at regional polls and Renzi is staking his political career on a constitutional referendum.
The ability of these leaders, together with those from the three other founding members of the EU, to revive the spirit of the Ventotene Manifesto without leaving the other member states feeling alienated is questionable.
The Visegrad group is a political grouping which includes Hungary, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Poland. All four countries are wary of Europe’s immigration crisis. For geostrategic reasons, their foreign policy is influenced by their proximity to two large and influential neighbours – Germany and Russia. For historical reasons, a nationalistic narrative is deeply embedded within their governing structures. All four countries currently have administrations that are pushing for a looser union built on the concept of a “Europe of Nation States.”
A great gulf seems to be developing between the EU institutions, the member states and the citizens
Mediterranean states such as Spain, Portugal and Greece are pushing for more economic flexibility. Blighted by the financial crisis, high rates of unemployment and austerity measures, these nations look at Germany’s role within the union with considerable suspicion. The prominence of left-wing populism within their political system challenges the common-held perception that populism is purely the domain of right-wing parties.
Scandinavian states, most notably Denmark and Sweden, face domestic challenges over immigration. The demographic changes in some major cities have incensed fears over the possible long-term effects on both the welfare systems and social cohesion.
Other countries, including Malta, lie on the periphery of such groupings. Countries on the periphery tend to be disengaged from the bigger picture but often focus on urgent matters which concern them most. They may include immigration, fiscal issues, Brexit and maritime issues.
As these groupings gain a stronger voice within the EU, the need to establish some form of common ground becomes more urgent. The EU undoubtedly needs to work on fostering a dynamic environment where each concern can be addressed. A great gulf seems to be developing between the EU institutions, member states and citizens. This situation can be disastrous for the overall project.
The principle of subsidiarity will be crucial to the future of the EU. This principle is enshrined in the Treaty of the European Union and stipulates that power should be exercised as close to the citizen as possible. While some decisions need to be taken at EU level, other decisions are best taken at the national level or even at regional or local level.
Subsidiarity is essential to ensure transparency and accountability as well as to give the various institutional structures added flexibility.
On the economic front, the need to create jobs and boost growth is acutely felt in some nations. High rates of youth unemployment are creating a disenfranchised and disaffected generation wary of traditional politics. Populism and, in some cases, extremism, are beginning to seem like viable alternatives. Such developments have wide-ranging consequences which go beyond the future of the EU as an institution.
The over-arching concerns shared by all five groupings concern security. The option of an EU army seems to be in the offing. This development is worrying. NATO, which also engages the US, Canada and the UK, is a more viable outward-looking option which has offered a measure of security in the continuity for over six decades.
Regarding migration, many governments are struggling to reach a viable consensus which takes into account the humanitarian aspect, domestic pressures on welfare systems, vast demographic changes and security challenges which might arise. Migration is not a new phenomenon. However, its current manifestation is fuelling the sense of crisis which dominates the EU.
Ultimately, the largest pitfall to avoid is to assume that the EU is a synonym for Europe. Doing so will only lead to inward-looking policies which have the seeds of their destruction sown within them.
The success of individual European countries always depended on their ability to look beyond their shores and their immediate neighbourhood. If the EU is to have a long future ahead, it must re-embrace this mind-set.
andre.deb@gmail.com
André DeBattista holds degrees in public policy and international relations and is a member of the Political Studies Association (UK) and a Fellow of the Royal Society of Arts.