Critique on the Article Developed by Kupchan on the Eminent Fall of the EU in the Next Decade - Essay Example

Name: Course: Tutor: Institution: Date: Analysis of Argument (Critique) Introduction The argument that the European Union is likely to fall in the next decade has in the recent past taken root. In this regard, literature and studies have been developed to perpetuate the argument and justify reasons as to why the union is unlikely to survive in the next decade. Such reviews include the article developed by Kupchan (2010) who argued on the eminent and likely demise and fall of EU. However, despite the article listing key reasons for its argument for failure, it failed to justify the argument based on a range of weaknesses and knowledge gaps exhibited. This essay offers a critique of the article, highlighting its argument weaknesses as well as highlighting counter arguments against the raised failure cause issues. Discussion On one hand, the article highlights the existing economic challenges in the EU region. In this regard, with its drafting just 2 years after the global financial crisis, the article argues on the negative implications of the GFC on the overall European economy. As such, it argued that the member states cost their purchasing powers due to increased inflation against rising costs of living. As such, it notes that nations evolved into international debts, making them unable to fund the union activities. Subsequent to these challenges, the article notes that the concept of nationalism has re emerged in the EU region forcing nations increased focus on their internal rather than regional affairs. Subsequently, the article develops a conclusion that this will result to the EU fall. However, this is not the case. On one hand, this essay argues that the conclusion was speculative rather than statistical. In this case, the article relied on the argument that respective nation’s interest on sovereignty would override their regional integration needs. In this regard, consequential developments in EU since 2010 have proved the theoretical speculation wrong. Instead of withdrawing into resolving individual domestic financial crisis, the EU members pooled together to overcome the GFC implications. For instance, as Watts (258) notes, the Greece case study is an ideal example of regional integration interests in the EU. In this regard, the member states pooled together to bail out Greece form its high international and public debt that risked its eventual fall and collapse. Therefore, this development is an indication that although members states face domestic economic issues, their drive and desire for regional integration remain. In addition, the article predicts the eminent fall of the EU based on its executive management. The EU under the Lisbon treaty voted for the establishment of a rotating presidency and foreign affairs posts. Subsequently, the union under Germany assistance elected Herman van Rompuy and Catherine Ashton were elected respectively. The two officials were charged by the union with the mandate of executing and running the overall union economic affairs. The article focuses on the previous careers by these individuals. In this regard, it establishes that prior to their elevation into these posts, both were low profile career professionals. As such, it argues they had no previous political history and thus served no threat to the existing member states leaders. In this regard, the article concludes that with increasing nationalism, the leaders will yield no political influence over the member states. Consequently, the article concluded that the EU will eventually fail. However, this critical analysis on the concept establishes that this argument is unsatisfactory. Through the analysis of the argument developed by El-Agraa and El-Agraa (53), it is apparent that the EU was from the formative years an economic rather than political union. In this regard, the union and its management were geared towards the election of qualified economists with professional skills and capacity to direct the regional economics. Therefore, based on this fact, it is inappropriate for the article to fault the election of professional career leaders to head the union. In fact, if the union elected political leaders to head the union, it would shift its focus from economic integration to political integration which would in turn into challenges between the Central, Eastern and Western Europe regions those posses’ diverse political ideologies. Therefore, the selection of low profile career leaders to head the union can instead be termed as a move likely to strengthen the union and enhance its existence and increased economic growth and influence in the region into the future. Thus the Dutch and French voter’s decision in 2005 rejecting legal and political integration of the union as quoted in the article can be argued as a milestone in proactively restraining EU management challenges into the future. In addition, the author links the rotating presidency in the union to challenges in management. In this regard, the article notes the challenges experienced by the Belgium political system, the presidency holder as of 2010, at the articles time of publication. In this regard, the article developed an argument that the Belgium political system faced with disagreements between the Dutch and the French citizens political disagreements. In this regard, the article argued that placing the presidency of the EU under such a political system signified its wrecked and dwindling leadership focus. However, this essay argues that this argument is both an over generalizations as well as misrepresentation o facts. As Baquero and Closa (130) argued, the EU rotating presidency enhances cohesion and increased member states representation. In this regard, the rotating of the presidency to Belgium despite its political challenges served as a wakeup call in its economic system. Further, the presidency award signified the EU economic agenda rather than political interests. The EU is mandated to manage and direct the regional economic affairs. In this case, it is imperative to acknowledge that in a developed economy and democracy, the political system and elections do not implicate on a nations economic performance. Therefore, the awarding of the presidency to Belgium despite the political challenges was an indication that the EU economic ideology has evolved and matured over the years to distinguish itself from the respective member states political systems. Therefore, based on this analysis, it is apparent that the adoption of this argument as a justification of the union fall in the next decade is unjustified and unworthy. Conclusion In summary, this essay offers a critique on the article developed by Kupchan on the eminent fall of the EU in the next decade. Overall, the article is based on the theme that rising nationality in the region will considerably boost the union disintegration. As such, the article basis is justification on the argument that domestic financial challenges will draw the members states focus from regional integration to resolving individual challenges. Moreover, the article argues that the election of low profile technocrats to head the union on a rotating basis signify its eminent political grip loss into the future. Further, the article points out on the case of Belgium 2010 political challenge and the awarding of the EU presidency as a sign of leadership weakness in the union. However, this essay establishes that these justification arguments are either misleading or insufficient to warrant the union fall. For instance, with respect to prioritization of domestic challenges over regional integration challenges resolution, the essay adopts the case study of Greece bail out as an indication of the persistent regional integration goodwill despite the existence of domestic challenges. On the other hand, the essay establishes that with its agenda s an economic rather than political union, the appointment of low profile technocrats to head its operations was a milestone towards its economic performance efficiency. Finally, the essay establishes the comparison between the union leadership futures to the Belgium political situation in 2010 is misguided as the two have diverse establishment and regulatory restrictions. Work Cited Baquero, Cruz J, and Carlos Closa. European Integration from Rome to Berlin, 1957-2007: History, Law and Politics. Bruxelles: P.I.E. Peter Lang, 2009. Print. El-Agraa, A M, and A M. El-Agraa. The European Union: Economics and Policies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007. Print. Kupchan, Charles A. "As Nationalism Rises, Will the European Union Fall?" Council on Foreign Relations. Washington Post, 27 Aug. 2010. Web. 18 July 2014. . Watts, Duncan. The European Union. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2008. Print. Read More