The Process of EU Integration - Essay Example

Making Reference to EU Policies and s, Identify and Assess Opposing Theoretical Arguments on the Process of EU Integration Table of Contents Table of Contents 2 Introduction 3 Intergovernmentalism and Different Forms of Supranationalism 4 Theories of Integration 7 Conclusion 16 References 17 Bibliography 21 Introduction European integration signifies that the European nations as well as states are eager to transfer and acquire sovereign power in a collective manner. The main objective of this integration was to unite the European nations as well as regions in a political and legal structure. The European Union (EU) comprises a population of 500 million as well as a huge economy. Moreover, the institutional structure of the EU is complex which includes an elected parliament, a supranational central administration, a Central Bank as well as a Court of Justice (Gilbert, 2012). The process of EU Integration is an approach in accordance with which political and economic along with legal factors are integrated in European countries. Moreover, the integration process involves EU, Council of Europe and international organisations which include the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) as well as Central European Free Trade Agreement (CEFTA). The EU is recognised as a supranational organisation constituting of 27 member states. A Treaty of Lisbon has been formulated with the intention of being identified as a legal entity throughout the European nations as well as regions. Furthermore, a document named inter alia has been devised with the motive formulating the roles of Minister of External Affairs as well as President of the European nations as well as regions (Social Inclusion and Poverty Reduction Unit, 2009). The EU is the result of integration on the basis of treaties between member nations as well as regions. This union of the member countries is developed based on an institutional framework. The European Institution comprises the Commission, the Parliament as well as the Council which formulate policies and execute the administration operations of the EU (ILSP, 2000). The discussion will emphasize on intergovernmentalism and different methods of supranationalism in the process of integration. The paper will also discuss the theories of integration as well as include examples of institutions and EU policies in order to obtain a clear concept of these theories. The discussion will further emphasize upon policies as well as fiscal unions in the EU. Intergovernmentalism and Different Forms of Supranationalism European integration is one of the most debated topics with regard to identifying the advancement of the integration process. The main concern is about the extent to which the union of the European countries as well as regions have been accomplished. Moreover, the integration process aims to recognise whether the EU is devoted more towards the intergovernmentalism or supranationalism. According to Schout and Wolff (2010), the European integration was devised with the aim of uniting the states as well as regions of the European nations in an effective manner. Moreover, the process of the European integration was conducted with the objective of uniting the political system of the nations. The Treaty of Lisbon had assisted the integration process by integrating as well as uniting the EU through supranationalism. Moreover, the Treaty also assisted in altering the idea of ‘community’ with ‘union’. However, it has been observed that the integration process had created much confusion in relation to the requirements of the member states as well as supranational institutions. The EU is developed with new functions which include European External Action Services (EEAS) and in this regard the President of European Commission (EC) has devised plans to support the intergovernmental aspects in the EU as the member states are identified to possess more power with the enactment of the Treaty of Lisbon. Schout and Wolff (2010) also stated that the concept of intergovernmentalism as well as supranationalism is interconnected in some respect with regard to the EU policies (Schout & Wolff, 2010). According to Jachtenfuchs (2001), the European integration has been determined to be segregated into two procedures which include classical integration theory and the governance approach. The classical theory of integration is considered as the dependent variable of the process whereas the governance is determined as a non-dependent variable. Jachtenfuchs (2001) also stated that neo-functionalism is based on the concept of modernisation with respect to globalisation as well as advancement of technology. In contrast, intergovernmentalism contradicts this concept of neo-functionalism and believes in international system. It has been observed that supranational system had been enacted in various areas or segments of the political system of Europe (Jachtenfuchs, 2001). Puchala stated that intergovernmentalists identify international cooperation as well as the rules and the institutions entrusted with the responsibility of broadening the process of integration. In this respect, intergovernmentalists are regarded to be the promoters, initiators as well as mediators for the enhancement of the European integration process. Supranational governance implies that the collaboration of international economic factors will help in regulating the interest as well as the security of the citizens in the European countries. Moreover, local as well as national along with supranational agents are entrusted with the responsibility to develop a transnational society. The transnational society will enable the government to operate in a collaborative manner. All these aspects will assist in better integration of European countries (Puchala, 1999). Weiler and Bogdandy (2003) stated that supranational integration is believed to play an important role with respect to the domestic concern. This theory is mainly based on human rights as well as is recognised as the first integration process in the European countries. The supranational theories are considered to the core theories of the integration process as well as they follow a bottom to top approach. Later on, intergovermentalism theories were formulated with the objective of developing international relations. These theories are the grand theories which follow a top to down approach (Weiler & Bogdandy, 2003). The EU had formulated a two-tier system with the objective of integrating the member states in the union. Moreover, this two-tier structure had assisted the member countries who adopted the European currency ‘Euro’ with the intention of boosting their development. The aspect of fiscal integration plays a major role in stabilising the fiscal policies of the European countries. There are five elements which may be acquired by the European countries in order to integrate the fiscal policies in an appropriate manner (Fuest & Peichl, 2012). These elements are as follows: Fiscal Rules, Policy Coordination and Supervision The fiscal union should consist of rules in the Stability and Growth Pact. These rules are to be provided to the member states or nations as well as should be coordinated in an appropriate manner (Fuest & Peichl, 2012). A Crisis Resolution Mechanism The European countries had devised a crisis resolution mechanism known as European Stabilisation Mechanism (ESM). This mechanism had been formulated with the intention of supporting financial institutions which face crises and difficulties in assessing the capital market (Fuest & Peichl, 2012). Joint Guarantee for Government Debt The fiscal union will operate as a guarantor with regard to government debt. The duration as well as the amount of debt along with governance to be provided under the guarantee may vary (Fuest & Peichl, 2012). Fiscal Equalisation and Other Mechanism for Transfers between Countries In the fiscal union, the transfer of various elements as mentioned above will be dependent on the obligation of member states as well as on the amount of debt which are unpaid (Fuest & Peichl, 2012). A Larger EU Budget and European Taxes The fiscal union is considered as the extension of the government budget among the EU. Moreover, the fiscal union is also determined as the collaboration of EU taxes (Fuest & Peichl, 2012). The political debates with regard to the fiscal institutions in European countries are mainly focussed on the rules as well as supervision of the fiscal policies along with the ESM which are determined as the crisis resolution mechanisms on a permanent basis (Fuest & Peichl, 2012). Theories of Integration There are various theories of integration which are utilised in the integration process in order to ascertain that the integration process of EU is adopted in an efficient as well as in a timely manner. The theories of EU integration are as follows: Federalism Federalism signifies that nations as well as different regions are required to make political decisions on the basis of common socio-economic as well as political objectives. In this respect, the integration process will be commenced through a common constitution. The main objective of this theory is to develop a federation of European countries and not a competing state (University of Munster, 2013). Federalism is an approach which is established with the notion of formulating adequate policies for the federal system of the EU. Spinelli and Rossi stated that a European Federation had been developed with the objective of elimination of segregating Europe in different sovereign states as well as nations. The main aim of this theory is to develop a federal European state. The European Union of Federalists (EUF) was founded in the year 1946 since the Resistance movements developed in the war-time (Oxford University Press, 2009). Functionalism The Functionalism theory of integration in traditional terms implies that there is a requirement of technocratic management i.e. important decisions are required to be made by technological experts in relation to economic as well as social policy. This integration of technocratic management in the decision making process has led to the development of international agencies. Moreover, these agencies assist in endorsing economic welfare of states or regions which later on aid them in developing themselves as international government (Europa University Viadrina, 2013). Mitrany stated that nationalism is the major cause of war and an international system had been developed with the objective of bringing the nations closer together with a common federal government. Mitrany in this respect opposed that integration of states or countries in such a close manner will harm the freedom of individual countries. Moreover, Mitrany also opposed to the concept of regional federation with the notion that it will create more rivalries at national level. In this regard, Mitrany recommended the development of a series of international agencies. Furthermore, these agencies will be bestowed with the authority of specific segments. The main objective of Mitrany’s perspective was to hand over all affairs of the government to international agencies (Oxford University Press, 2009). Realism Realism is a dominant theory of international relations (IR). Moreover, it is a traditional theory which assumes that sovereign states are the central units essential for understanding IR. The states are more concentrated on power, politics as well as on sovereignty and are less concerned about integration (Kai Arzheimer, 2013). Neo-functionalism Neo-functionalism signifies that the economic policies are required to be implemented in an efficient manner with the objective of acquiring enhanced economic integration among the states or nations (Schmitter, 2002). Ernst Haas was the person responsible for developing the Neo-functionalism theory for European integration. Haas stated that there are four key prospects which are argued in this theory. These arguments are as follows: The notion of ‘state’ is very much complex as advocated by realists The activities of bureaucratic individuals as well as interest groups are not limited to the domestic political regions In international politics non-state individuals play an imperative role ‘Spillover’ pressures are the reason for the advancement of the European integration Neo-functionalism is recognised as a pluralist theory with regard to international politics as compared to the traditional theory of realists. In accordance with this theory, state is not a unified actor. Moreover, this theory signifies that states play a role in international activities due to pressures from bureaucratic individuals as well as interest groups. Furthermore, pressures determine the explanation for the decisions which are made by the government. In this respect, analysts are required to recognise strength as well as direction of the pressures in an appropriate manner in order to predict behaviours of the government in relation to IR. Accordingly, both national as well as international pressures should be recognised in order to advance the integration process of the national government (Oxford University Press, 2009). This theory was later divided into ‘transnationalism’ and ‘transgovernmentalism’. Transnationalism denotes that interest groups who are nationally based are required to interact with identical groups in other countries. Transgovermentalism implies that departments of a state are required to develop links with similar departments in other states which are unregulated by foreign offices (Oxford University Press, 2009). Neo-functionalists utilised the perception of spillover which signifies that on acquiring the notion of integration, the government is required to initiate steps or actions in order to accomplish the integration process. There are two sorts of spillover which include functional and political spillover. Functional spillover signifies that the integration of one functional sector will improve the interconnection with other sectors which will bring about spillover in those sectors. In this respect, technical pressure is determined to integrate other relevant sectors in order to operate in an enhanced manner. Political spillover denotes that political pressure is developed with the concept of integrating political factors within a state. The political pressure further clarifies the significance of supranational as well as subnational actors in order to integrate in an enhanced manner for accomplishing self-interests. Moreover, political integration will enable the government to identify benefits as well as to handover a certain amount of sovereignty (Oxford University Press, 2009). Intergovernmentalism Intergovernmentalism is the horizontal as well as vertical integration of policies of the government. Moreover, this theory is required to assist in better cooperation among states with the objective of reducing transactional cost as well as enhancing the development of individual states (Fabbrini, 2012). Stanley Hoffmann had devised the theory of intergovenmentalism with the intention to oppose the perspective of the neo-functionalism theory. The intergovermentalism theory had criticised the neo-functionalism on three grounds which are as follows: European integration is to be viewed as a global integration process. In this regard, regional integration is just one facet of the integration process. Moreover, neo-functionalists were not concerned about the condition of the international background National governments were determined to be important for the advancement of European integration process National governments were concerned about the national interests and about making an integration with technical sectors but the integration process failed to spread in the segments of national security as well as defence In this respect, Hoffmann opposed to the concept of neo-functionalism theory by presenting the consideration that pressures are determined to be an important aspect in the integration process (University of Munster, 2013). Liberal Intergovernmentalism Liberal intergovernmentalism theory was developed by Andrew Moravcsik. In this theory, Moravcsik had merged the concept of intregovernmetalism theory with neo-functionalism theory. The theory denotes that states have control over the process of integration. Moreover, Moravcsik undertook the concept that the states play an important role in the integration process as well as in determining economic benefits (Civitas, 2011). There are certain criticisms to be self-recognised with respect to neo-functionalists which are as follows: The theories of European integration are required to be supplemented with further general theories with regard to national responses with a view to global interdependence The responses on common policy are required to be evaluated. Moreover, the transfer of authority has been observed to fail in relation to the acquisition of sovereignty by the EC The policy making procedure of the European nations are required to be assisted with various theories (The Trustees of Princeton University, 2013) These criticisms should be considered as significant factors. In this respect, a theory should be formulated with the intention of minimising these criticisms as well as integrating European countries in an enhanced manner. This theory of Moravcsik is based on two concepts which include domestic politics and the position of the government. Domestic politics is concerned with the preferences as well as the economic interests of the government of the states. The position as well as the arrangement of the government will determine the success of the integration process (Moravsik, 1995). For example, in case of monetary union, it is necessary to understand the purpose for the development of the banks before considering about the constitution of the European Central Bank (ECB). The theory of Moravcsik had been criticised due to being selective in the choices of sources. Moreover, the liberal intergovernmentalism theory did not consider the interdependence of institutions. This theory has also been criticised on the ground that it failed to estimate the interdependence concept on a global prospect as well as sovereignty at national level. This theory of Moravcsik had ignored the transnational factors (Kai Arzheimer, 2013). Therefore, the theory of Moravcsik is determined to possess the above mentioned disadvantages in the methodologies of this theory. Interdependence Theory The interdependence theory signifies that with the development of technology as well as industrialisation had led to the interdependence of states and nations. The theory is based on the assumption that the integration of the European nations as well as regions improves with the advancement of international interdependency. There are a few factors which are responsible for the enhanced interdependency which include development of international organisations as well as formulation of transnational policies in areas or segments where required (Global Education Leadership, 2012). Supranational Governance The supranational governance signifies that policies are formulated with the objectives of developing a better transactional society as well as creating organisations for enacting the policies in an effective manner. Furthermore, the author of supranational governance, Karl Deutsch opposed to the adaptation of international policies (Kassim & Menono, 2010). Conclusion The European nations had planned for an integration process with the objective of obtaining as well as bestowing sovereign power in a combined manner. The main purpose of the integration process was to tie up the European nations as well as states in a collaborative manner in relation to legal and political prospects. The EU is integrated politically as well as legally along with in terms of fiscal concerns in order to effectively unite the European countries. There are various integration theories which were formulated with the intention of uniting the European nations in an efficient manner. The authors of these theories have debated exclusively for attaining better integration of the member states or countries. The main integrations theories which are considered for European integration process are intergovernmentalism and supranationalism. There are debates over these theories from the early stage of the integration process. Suprantionalism is based on the concept of uniting the member states domestically. Moreover, suprantionalism develops a transnational society as well as facilitates to develop supranational organisations. Intergovernmentalism is based on the integrating the European countries with better IR. Furthermore, intergovernmentalism is based on adopting international policies for integrating the European countries in an effective manner. References Civitas, 2011. Theories of European Integration. EU Facts. [Online] Available at: http://www.civitas.org.uk/eufacts/OS/OS16.html [Accessed February 11, 2013]. Europa University Viadrina, 2013. Theories of European Integration. Document. [Online] Available at: http://www.kuwi.europa-uni.de/de/lehrstuhl/vs/politik3/Dokumente/lehre/europeanintegration/lecture5-1-2006theory.pdf [Accessed February 11, 2013]. Fabbrini, S., 2012. Intergovernmentalism and Its Outcomes: The Implications of the Euro Crisis on the European Union. Files. [Online] Available at: http://eucenter.berkeley.edu/files/Fabbrini.17Feb2012.pdf [Accessed February 11, 2013]. Fuest, C. & Peichl, A., 2012. European Fiscal Union: What Is It? Does It Work? And Are There Really ‘No Alternatives’?. Policy Paper Series, No. 39, pp. 1-10. Gilbert, M., 2012. European Integration: A Concise History. Rowman & Littlefield. Global Education Leadership, 2012. International Regime and Interdependence Theories. Uploads. [Online] Available at: http://www.globaleducationleadership.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/EU-handout-Week-11.pdf [Accessed February 11, 2013]. ILSP, 2000. The European Integration. Foreword. [Online] Available at: http://www.xanthi.ilsp.gr/kemeseu/ [Accessed February 11, 2013]. Jachtenfuchs, M., 2001. The Governance Approach to European Integration. Journal of Common Market Studies, Vol. 39, No. 2, pp. 245–64. Kai Arzheimer, 2013. Theories of European Integration. EU Integration after Lisbon. [Online] Available at: http://www.kai-arzheimer.com/Political-Integration-EU/eu-7-print.pdf [Accessed February 11, 2013]. Kassim, H. & Menono, A., 2010. Bringing the Member States Back in: The Supranational Orthodoxy, Member State Resurgence and The Decline of the European Commission Since the 1990s. Virtual Paper Room. [Online] Available at: http://www.jhubc.it/ecpr-porto/virtualpaperroom/134.pdf [Accessed February 11, 2013]. Moravsik, A., 1995. Liberal Intergovernmentalism and Integration: A Rejoinder. Journal of Common Market Studies, Vol. 33, No. 4, pp. 611-628. Oxford University Press, 2009. Theories of European Integration. Chapter 1. [Online] Available at: http://fds.oup.com/www.oup.com/pdf/13/9780199544813_chapter1.pdf [Accessed February 11, 2013]. Puchala, D. J., 1999. Institutionalism, Intergovernmentalism and European Integration: A review Article. Journal of Common Market Studies, Vol. 37, No. 2, pp. 317-331. Schout, A. & Wolff, S., 2010. Fifth Pan-European Conference on EU Politics Porto, Portugal -- 23-26 June 2010 “How EU Institutions Form Positions”. Virtual Paper Room. [Online] Available at: http://www.jhubc.it/ecpr-porto/virtualpaperroom/086.pdf [Accessed February 11, 2013]. Schmitter, P. C., 2002. Neo-Neo-Functionalism. Documents. [Online] Available at: http://www.eui.eu/Documents/DepartmentsCentres/SPS/Profiles/Schmitter/NeoNeoFunctionalismRev.pdf [Accessed February 11, 2013]. Social Inclusion and Poverty Reduction Unit, 2009. The Process of European Integration. Related Processes. [Online] Available at: http://www.inkluzija.gov.rs/?page_id=1813&lang=en [Accessed February 11, 2013]. The Trustees of Princeton University, 2013. Liberal Intergovernmentalism. Library. [Online] Available at: http://www.princeton.edu/~amoravcs/library/intergovernmentalism.pdf [Accessed February 11, 2013]. University of Munster, 2013. Theories of European Integration I. Documents. [Online] Available at: http://www.uni-muenster.de/Politikwissenschaft/Doppeldiplom/docs/TheoriesEI1.pdf [Accessed February 11, 2013]. Weiler, J. H. H. & Bogdandy, A. V., 2003. European Integration: The New German Scholarship. Jean Monnet Working Paper, No. 9, pp. 1-33. Bibliography Allerkamp, D. K., 2009. Intergovernmentalism, Reloaded. The Transformative Power of ‘Intergovernmental’ Council Policy‐Making. [Online] Available at: http://aei.pitt.edu/33017/2/Allerkamp._Doreen.pdf [Accessed February 11, 2013].    Bargain, O. & et. al., 2012. Fiscal Union in Europe? Redistributive and Stabilising Effects of an EU Tax-Benefit System. Discussion Paper No. 6585. [Online] Available at: http://ftp.iza.org/dp6585.pdf [Accessed February 11, 2013]. Chiriac, C., 2012. European Governance: Is Subsidiarity Principle A Compromise between Supranationalists and Intergovernmentalists or A Constitutive Principle of Multi-Level System?. Papers. [Online] Available at: http://www.upm.ro/proiecte/EEE/Conferences/papers/S326.pdf [Accessed February 11, 2013]. Cottarelli, C., 2012. European Fiscal Union: A Vision for the Long Run. Speeches. [Online] Available at: http://www.imf.org/external/np/speeches/2012/110112.htm [Accessed February 11, 2013]. European Union, 2012. Fiscal Union. Press Release. [Online] Available at: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-12-483_en.htm [Accessed February 11, 2013]. Hill, S., 2013. A Two-Tier EU Is Preferable To David Camerons In or Out Vote. Comment is Free. [Online] Available at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jan/29/two-tier-european-union [Accessed February 11, 2013]. Hooghe, L. & Marks, G., 2008. A Postfunctionalist Theory of European Integration: From Permissive Consensus to Constraining Dissensus. B.J.Pol.S., Vol. 39, pp. 1-23. Latoszek, E. & et. al., 2012. European Integration Process in the New Regional and Global Settings. User Upload. [Online] Available at: http://www.nauka.gov.pl/fileadmin/user_upload/ministerstwo/Publikacje/20120228_european_integration_process_in_the_new_global_settings.pdf [Accessed February 11, 2013]. Tsebelis, G. & Garrett, G., 2001. The Institutional Foundations of Intergovernmentalism and Supranationalism in the European Union. International Organization, Vol. 55, No. 2, pp. 357-390. Read More