Recent European Union Treaties - Essay Example

Democracy and the European Union The European Union (EU) is a supranational body composed of constituent member s, found largely on the Europeanpeninsula. Democracy, negotiation, and collective decision-making through multilateralism are all inherent attributes of the modern EU. Recent treaties, despite certain shortcomings, have overall been quite beneficial to EU members and have strengthened the bonds between member states while enhancing the democratic character of the European Union. In fact this essay argues that the failure of the recent EU Constitutional actually affirms the fundamental democratic character of the EU and is not the result of a so-called “democratic deficit”. Membership in the European Union is advantageous to all members because the EU represents the best of the European democratic tradition and is an expression of its constituent members. As a multinational organization, the EU represents various national interests within an overarching political framework. The EU is a multilateral organization which operates on the basis of negotiation between member states and relies on collective decision making to achieve its ends. Members are joined together and bound by treaties signifying their participation within the larger EU political framework. The political decisions of member-states are thus constrained by their allegiance and signatory status to overarching EU treaties (Almond et al. 455-6). Although it has not always been the case, modern-day Europe is characterized by a unifying democratic political culture. While the concept of democracy originated on its shores, the philosophy of democratic governance was challenged in 20th century Europe by authoritarian political movements, including fascism (expressed by Nazi Germany & Mussolini’s Italy), and communism (as exemplified in Eastern Europe during the Cold War). With Allied victory in World War II and the collapse of the Soviet Union, democracy became a universal trend amongst European states. In fact liberal democracy, best expressed by the states of Western Europe with entrenched democratic traditions, is quickly becoming the standard for the continent (Almond et al. 26-53). Democratic norms and rules have subsequently been established through a pan-European legal framework, the European Union. Two early treaties established the normative, and inherently democratic, framework for today’s EU. The Treaty of Rome, signed in March of 1957, proposed a common European economic market throughout the European Economic Community. Historically-speaking this was perhaps the most important precursor to the integration of Europe today (Wood & Quaisser 41). Recent treaties, including the Treaty of Amsterdam, the Treaty of Nice, and the failed EU Constitution all followed the precedent set more than 40 years ago in Rome. Despite some controversies, democracy remains alive and well within the EU political framework. In fact, the recent failure to implement a Constitution for Europe affirmed the democratic underpinnings of the Union and proved that debate and collective decision making are inherent components of the working European Union. The Maastricht Treaty (1993) creating the European Union, replaced the European Community, and paved the way for further economic, social, and political integration within Europe. This integration was strengthened through the implementation of three institutional pillars: 1) European Communities; 2) Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), and 3) police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters, and the acceptance of a single currency, the Euro (Almond et al. 466-8). In addition to the three pillars, the acceptance of the Euro as an official currency of members of the so-called “Eurozone” strengthened economic bonds between member states. Following negotiations in the Dutch city of Maastricht, the Treaty of Amsterdam (1999) represented a further evolution of collective decision making amongst EU members. The Treaty of Amsterdam strengthened the power of the European Parliament and the European Court of Justice, as well as the role of the EU in the fields of public health, immigration, and criminal affairs, as well as enhanced foreign and security policies by entrenching concerted, multilateral action in these realms(Almond et al. 468-9). While the development of a Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) has been controversial despite recent European foreign policy failures, such as the collective European response to genocide in the Balkans, it joins and unites EU members towards common foreign policy goals (Wood & Quaisser 118). Although largely unfounded, some member states, including the UK and France, feared the loss of autonomy in key policy areas such as foreign affairs (Wood & Quaisser 141). As arguably the most representative body of the EU, the European Parliament allocates seats to all member states. Amsterdam provided further institutional basis for the European Parliament and enhanced the concept of Citizenship of the Union. In spite of worries surrounding increased integration, particularly in the political and social fields, the Treaty of Amsterdam put in place measures for the EU to safeguard the rights of European citizens continent-wide. Amsterdam institutionalized co-operation in the judicial realm and the European Court of Justice is arguably the most pronounced example of the attempt to ensure common judicial standards throughout Europe (Almond et al. 468-9). Following the framework established in Amsterdam, the Treaty of Nice (2001) set out to prepare the EU for enlargement and provided an institutional basis for growth in Eastern Europe. Expansion east-ward seemed like the natural step following the collapse of the Soviet Bloc with the belief that integration between East and West would be mutually beneficial in the social, political, realms (Warleigh 13). Additionally, the states of the East hoped to enhance their democratic credentials and subsequently gain entrance into an enlarged EU (Warleigh 102). With Nice, the European established the rules for growth, thus providing an institutional basis for enlargement. Examples of potential candidates for membership following Nice included Slovakia, and Romania and even Turkey (Warleigh 89). Nice also amended the electoral framework of the Council, enlarging the EU Parliament and determining how power should be shared following enlargement. New articles were made subject to qualified majority voting (QMV). As a commitment to democracy, QMV, voting is based on population size with each member state awarded a certain number of votes based upon its relative size. The voting capabilities of states were also re-weighted following Nice. This was controversial because large states (the “big four”: Britain, Germany, Italy and France) would receive a greater share of voting power vis-à-vis smaller states (Wood & Quaisser 119). In Addition, states kept their veto power over key domestic issues such as taxation and social policy. Nice established the rules of the game for enlargement and gave the elder players (Britain, Germany, Italy and France) a privileged position within the enlarged framework. More controversially, the Irish Republic rejected the Nice Treaty in a referendum, the only country legally obligated to hold a vote on the subject. Despite the fact that Ireland initially rejected the proposed enlargement of the EU, a year later it accepted the provisions of Nice, providing a fine example of European democracy at work (Helm). Finally, the proposed EU Constitution (2003) was left unimplemented after failed referendums in France and the Netherlands. Debate ensued over the complexity and length of the proposed Draft Constitution, the extension of qualified majority voting, the question of national versus union law, and the role of the Commission in the democratic functioning of the Union. Because the European Commission is made up by appointees and not elected officials, the democratic legitimacy of this unelected body was cast into doubt. Described by many as a “democratic deficit” within the EU, it was likely an important factor for the failure of the Draft Constitution to be implemented as law Additional concerns included the potential ascension of Turkey into the ranks of the EU (Wood & Quaisser 119). Although the Draft Constitution failed, the debate that it stimulated amongst members of the EU, as well as within member states, is important Democracy was again displayed when conditions were made to ensure that the Draft Constitution was ratified by all members and not simply imposed from above. (Wood & Quaisser 65-75) Critics of the EU argue that this multinational organization, which inherently undermines national – local – concerns of member states. They also describe the EU as an undemocratic and unrepresentative form of government. This is not the case. The European collectivity, as an example of “pooled sovereignty” (Almond et al. 455), is in fact an evolution of the European democratic tradition and a positive force for democracy on the continent. Treaties bind members to a common good and force constituent states to compromise and work towards a common goal. Examples of this include the combined EU effort to propose a solution to the long-running Palestinian-Israeli conflict (Morris). Described as a “confederated state” (Almond et al. 7), the European Union represents an evolution of the European democratic tradition. Europe is the cradle of modern democracy, and modern European states have successfully maintained a democratic tradition for centuries. Tilly rightful demonstrates entrenched liberal democracy using the case of Britain (104-141). Despite claims that legislation enacted in Brussels bypasses the rights of individual states, the opposite is true. All states within the union participate in its decision making process. The European Union is arguably the world’s most successful attempt at regional integration. The motto of the EU is “unity in diversity” (Wood & Quaisser 118) and collective bargaining, negotiation, and a plurality of opinion are attributes of today’s EU. The European Union represents democracy at work and recent treaties obligating all members to abide by common standards in the political and social realms affirm a common standard among the states of Europe. In fact, “by agreeing to pursue that interest within an organization as constraining as the European Union, the member-states have recognized the ultimate superiority of multilateral, as opposed to unilateral, decision making and action in a variety of policy arenas” (Almond et al. 455). Accordingly, multilateralism democracy, and collective decision making are at the heart of today’s European Union to the benefit of all member states. Works Cited Almond, Gabriel A, Russell J. Dalton & G. Bingham Powel Jr. European Politics Today, 2nd edition. New York: Longman, 2002. Helm, James. “Ireland: an EU Success Story”. British Broadcasting Corporation. 2007. 10 June 2008 Morris, Chris. “Arafat calls for EU help for peace” British Broadcasting Corporation 2003. 13 June 2008 < http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3177395.stm > Tilly, Charles. European Revolutions. London: Blackwell, 1993. Warleigh, Alex. European Union: The Basics. New York: Routledge, 2004. Wood, Steve and Wolfgang Quaisser. The New European Union: Confronting the Challenges of Integration. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2008. Read More