Is the EUs decision-making process best characterized as federal or intergovernmental - Essay Example

? INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION Is the EU’s decision-making process best characterized as federal or intergovernmental?  An organization with an international scope, membership or presence is known as an International Organization. These organizations are either nongovernmental or intergovernmental. The type of nongovernmental organization that operates internationally includes organizations such as International Committee of the Red Cross and the World Organization of the Scout Movement. Multinational corporations are also part of the International organizations and include Coca Cola Company and Toyota. International governmental organizations are otherwise known as intergovernmental organizations. The member states make up such organizations, which are the sovereign states. United Nations, European Union, Council of Europe, World Trade Organization, the Council of Europe and many more are examples of intergovernmental organizations. However, the European Union is a prime example of supranational organization where the governments of the member states delegate the negotiated power to the member states. It is often referred to as a federation. This paper will closely observe the works of the European Union, and whether it is best characterized as federal or intergovernmental. The founding members of the European Union held the same ideals of a peaceful, united and prosperous Europe. They belonged to diverse backgrounds. In the Second World War, bloody wars culminated between neighbors. The purpose behind the establishment of the European was primarily to end these wars. In order to secure the lasting peace, European Coal and Steel Community began to unite the European countries economically and politically. There are six main founders, including France, Germany, Belgium, Italy, Luxemburg and Netherlands. There was a cold war between the East and the West in 1950’s. In 1956, the Soviet tanks had put down the protests in Hungary against the Communist regimes. In the following year, Soviet Union had launched their first man made space satellite, Sputnik 1. This is when they took the lead in the space race. The European Economic Community or ‘Common Market’ was created due to the Treaty of Rome. With the establishment of the EEC, the six nations decided to expand their relations to other economic sectors along with coal and steel. With the establishment of the common market, goods and services were to move freely within the six nations in Europe (Europea n.d. n.p) In 1962, the newly formed European Union began the common agricultural policy, which gave the nations within the union joint control over all the food produced within these nations (Matthew J 2011 n.p). In 1968, the six nations decide to remove custom duties on goods, which were imported from one another and allowed free cross border trade. Trade between the nations rapidly increased due to this. In 1973, three more nations joined the union making it a total of nine. The three newly joined nations were United Kingdom, Denmark, and Ireland. In 1974, the leaders in European Union established a European Regional Development Fund. The purpose for the funds were to transfer money from the richer region to the poorer regions help improve roads and communications, later on down the road this funding takes up one third of the unions spending. Citizens of the union were involved in the election of the union in 1979, when they were given the right to elect the members of the Parliament of the union. Previously, the members of the parliaments were delegated by the national parliaments. In 1981, Greece joined the union and the tally of nation within the union hit double figures. Spain and Portugal joined the union in 1986. The union launched the Erasmus programme in 1987 to fund for students who were interested in studying for up to 1 year in another European country. This scheme ended up benefiting more than 2 million young students (European Union Background 9 Jan 2012.n.p) The Treaty on European Union was signed in 1992, this set a rule for a future with a single currency throughout the region along with foreign and security policy and closer cooperation in justice and home affairs. This was the first time the countries within the union were known as the European Union. Single market within the nations was established in 1993 allowing for free movement of goods, services, people and money. The union agrees on over 200 laws since 1986 which covered regulation of business, tax policy, and such issues within the union and opened barriers for new frontiers in the market (European Union n.d n.p). In 1995, Austria, Finland, and Sweden joined the union making the total now 15. In the same year, Schengen Agreement is passed within the union but between 7 nations; Germany, Belgium, Spain, Luxembourg, France, Portugal, and Netherlands. This allowed citizens of these countries to travel between them without a passport, other nations of the union joined the agreement later on down the road. The Euro was introduced in 1999 and 11 countries began using it for financial and commercial transaction. In 2004 ten more nations joined the union; Czech Republic, Cyprus, Malta, Lithuania, Latvia, Hungary, Slovakia, Estonia, Poland, and Slovenia. In 2007 Bulgaria and Romania joined the EU making the total 27. In the same year all 27 nations signed the Treaty of Lisbon which was initiated to make the union more efficient, democratic, and transparent. The treaty was aimed to tackle problems such as climate change, security and sustainable development. All nations must ratify the treaty before entering the union. In the union, there are 23 different languages spoken and currently 27 nations. The union consists of many institutions such as the European Commission, European Council, European Central Bank and Court of Justice of the European Union which operate within the union. Brussel, Belgium is known as the capital of the European Union as it hosts the institutions of the union. The official seats of the European Commission, European Council, and Council of European Union along with second seat of the European Parliament are in Brussels. The official Parliament is however in France. In the decision making of the EU, well-known European Commission and Council of Ministers exists. There are several roles of these committees. One of the roles is to bring the outside actors together by integrating the independent expertise from them. The national interests are aggregated into the Community decisions. This is done by inviting the domestic civil servants into various decision-making arenas of the Union. Council working parties is another central arena where the national civil servants get involved in the decision making. A question regarding the domestic civil servants is asked in this policy memo. The question focuses on whether the civil servants act as national representatives and independent experts, or do they also become re-socialized into the supranational actors. It is between intergovernmenatlism and supranationalism between which the European Union and the EU institutions have always evolved. These are completely opposing poles and they relate to the relative sovereignty, autonomy and independence of the EU and European nation states. The big member states govern the EU institutions. In addition, EU integration is highlighted by the intergovernmental end of this cleavage. The governance that is beyond territorial states, due to Supranationalism, highlights the independent role of the EU institutions. Traditionally, the European Commission is envisioned as a supranational institution that is equal to excellence. On the other hand, the Council of Ministers is seen as the intergovernmental body of the Union. The EU institutions are generally considered as both supranational and intergovernmental. If an institution constitutes of national politicians and civil servants from different nation states, it is envisaged as intergovernmental. The idea behind this is to integrate the national ideas from the member states into Community decision making. Whilst, a supranational institution comprises of such Community decision makers who primarily have the role of community representatives (Trondal, 2003, pg 4-6);. However, the role of federalism is one, which is opposite to globalization, with integrity and identity of respective states; it does not unify an identity but merely joins decision makers across Europe as representatives from different nations. In a method where horizontal communication is predominant the EU showcases the qualities of a large federal structure. The principle of autonomy of the units which make up the Union and the Complementary principle of their participation in the exercise of common powers is reflected in the dual representation of citizens or of peoples, and of states or of member units at the heart of a chamber of representatives and a chamber of states. The common powers are clearly stated according to the division of responsibilities vis-a-vis the dimensions of the tasks to be accomplished. At various levels of a commune, a region or a land, of a state or of a federation on the European scale, there are corresponding autonomous and interdependent powers defined by the dimension of the task and according to capabilities. As the dimensions of the tasks increase and surpass the capacity of individual European states, new responsibilities will be entrusted to the higher decision makers in the European Union. This method, which makes use of the principle of subsidiary, allows a state to unburden overload towards a European federation but also towards the regions, the local powers or the private sector. This implies studying at which level collectively, privately or publicly a task can be most efficiently accomplished, taking into account the available resources and capacities (Dur, 2007, pg 1-3). The EU has several con federal qualities: Citizens of the member states don’t relate directly to most of the EU institutions. All but the European Parliament derive their authority not from the citizens of the member states, but from the leaders and governments and member states. The member states still have their own separate identities. The most important elected political leaders in the EU are still heads of government of the member states who are not directly elected to that position . There is no European military or defense system. Recent attempts to create one were turned down in referendums in Denmark and France. Along with these points, The EU has evolved itself as the greatest economic structure of all times, EU has reduced borders to mere geographical partitions and collected different economies together as a single one. Today bilateral trade is made easiest as the currency that is used is Euro, a milestone and a hallmark that shows the perfect workings of a federal structure. However there is no European tax system. Nevertheless, considerations are underway to construct the baselines of a strong tax structure (Ash, 2005, n.p). Now, let’s focus on what respective ideologies believe and argue in this regard. Federalists insist that it is best for the commission to serve as executive, as it has the wider interests of the community. (All the representatives must work aloof of the national interest.). Indeed, the Commission was central to pushing through the common market and single market, two EU measures that has brought EU several economic bounties. The Commission consists of unelected officers, as it stands one or maybe two are representing each nation sent by them, who run a technocracy. There are concerns that as such it is not sufficiently democratic. However, the issue has improved recently with the Parliament now approving each individual Commissioner and scrutinizing the Commission more closely, but some people suggest a more radical democratization, in that way there would be elections of a president. This measure would enable the European population to have a greater say as they would now have greater electorate, but lack of knowledge and awareness acts as a barrier. Federalists nonetheless hope it can add sufficient democratic legitimacy. The federalist model has the European Council stepping down from its oft-vetoing role, though some suggest a second chamber representing member states and their regions to take its place. Intergovernmentalists want a very different Europe. Prominent in Britain and France, they want control over joint projects to lie in the hands of respective governments. This would enable the ministers to be strongest and the European council to be the strongest of all, with ministers agreeing on matters in their tasks and heads of government deciding the most difficult questions and controlling the EU. The Commission and Parliament would take a less prominent role. Intergovernmentalists desire the Commission to be totally weakened as an executive, casting it more as a civil service charged with suggestion and implementation of new measures. The Parliament would thus become a legislative body passing measures, scrutinizing their execution and perhaps in a second, regionally based chamber-enforcing subsidiary, along with national parliaments of the different nations. Their arguments for this often-centered around democracy as they believe it is the core. The main line of argument lies with the concern of people, they believe that the elected members are representatives of people rather than bureaucrats so they should make such decisions which places greatest influence on the lives of Europeans .They tend to believe that democracy should not be extended beyond the nation state, either because of pragmatic concerns over Europe's size and many languages or because of an ideological as different ideologies find it difficult to co-exist, often conservative, attachment to historic nation states as distinct and different polities. The fact that they also often want radical reforms for the EU must be remembered. Federalists' primary concern with their model seems to be with its efficiency at promoting truly international policies which can be of great benefit, but both models must be evaluated on democracy as well as efficiency and that would make any model a successful one. The moment has arrived where the members of the federating core or the federalists are facing a choice and that is whether to follow and implement sovereignty in regal matters and in socio-economic affairs; or to get mixed up in intergovernmental system, in confrontations of national interest from which will emerge a new power, Germany for example. For whom both the United States and Russia will be the privileged partners and that to many is seriously undesirable. However, only the first option will make sure that a trans-Atlantic dialogue takes place on the US-EU axis and an efficient Russian-EU partnership. They are facing a choice between a German Europe and a European Germany at the heart of the European Union. The Nice Declaration left the situation open: “by having opened the road to enlargement, the Conference wishes that a wider and more profound debate should be started on the future of the EU. In 2001, the Swedish and Belgian presidencies, in cooperation with the Commission and with the participation of the European Parliament, should encourage a debate between all interested parties: national parliamentarians, politicians, economic and university leaders, and representatives of the general public, etc”. The growing influence of EU has brought a time where the impact also poses a challenge on its functions and structure. The Union and its member states, which are in the process of federalization or regionalization and companies, practice the federal method, wittingly or not. Deprived of its public strength and authority, the European Union is barred to innovate it has done nothing lately, its power is merely residing more on promotion, coordination, stimulation and adhesion than on constraint or ferity. With respect to diversities, indispensable participation and the free right to join are the two essential traits of this enterprising political innovation, that is the European Union. This search for an unprecedented European Federalism is founded on some of the federal principles and is taken from the federal and community-orientated events and experiences. It is based on conventional European culture and setup, vast in diversity in which the politics reflect incarnations in the various forms of a typical federal Union. The federal principle appears to be the most apt to take on the new technology whilst guaranteeing the blossoming of cultural riches including national identities into a unit that is susceptible of creating a successful community of destiny and to hold Europeans together in the times ahead and lead as an example for the world (Duff 2011 n.p). Analysis/Conclusion Some have argued that the EU can be seen as an ‘economic giant but a political dwarf.’ The almost 20% input on the global trade platform speaks for itself. What started with the union of 6 nations now consists of 27 European countries that come together under one roof known as the EU. One wonders how positively that will and can continue to function in this complex globalised world. There is also the issue of sovereignty where the question turns to the sovereignty of not one, but 27 independent nations. On the other hand, Europe’s history is filled with tragedies, wars and bloodshed. It can be seen that in its current state, with a majority of its nations unified together, the fear of a world war is constantly comforted with the presence of an open market, the easy movement of goods and people within the continent and summits held throughout the year to strengthen relations. However, the world does not constrict itself to Europe anymore. The new world was discovered centuries ago, and very recently, the impact of globalization has made the world profoundly interconnected. Depending on which side of the coin is being looked at, Europe has come a long way to be able to discuss world matters in one voice, a voice that she is still struggling to master proper control of; the other side of the coin entails another way of dividing the world at yet another level, the side where there is the ‘us and them’ sides, where one falls into the EU or does not, as a result of which national interests form a labyrinth of its own. References Actrav.itcilo.org (1999) European Union (EU). [online] Available at: http://actrav.itcilo.org/actrav-english/telearn/global/ilo/blokit/eu.htm [Accessed: 18 Jun 2012]. Bigissueground.com (2005) The EU's Future: The Federalism/Intergovernmentalism Debate. [online] Available at: http://www.bigissueground.com/politics/ash-eufuture.shtml [Accessed: 18 Jun 2012]. Dur, A. (2007) The EU in the World Economy. p.1-3. Europa.eu (1945) EUROPA - The history of the European Union. [online] Available at: http://europa.eu/about-eu/eu-history/index_en.htm [Accessed: 18 Jun 2012]. History.com (2010) European Union (EU) — History.com Articles, Video, Pictures and Facts. [online] Available at: http://www.history.com/topics/european-union-eu [Accessed: 18 Jun 2012]. Indexmundi.com (1940) European Union Background - Introduction. [online] Available at: http://www.indexmundi.com/european_union/background.html [Accessed: 18 Jun 2012]. Spinelligroup.eu (2011) “Federal Union Now” : new publication by Andrew DUFF || Spinelli Group. [online] Available at: http://www.spinelligroup.eu/2011/09/05/federal-union/ [Accessed: 18 Jun 2012]. Trondal, J. (2003) How Supranational are Intergovernmental Organizations? Assessing the Socializing Power of Council Working Parties. Centre for European Studies, p.4-6. Read More