Historical Factors and Theories of Integration which Led to the Formation of the European Union - Coursework Example

Historical Factors and Theories of Integration which led to The Formation of The European Union Customer Inserts His/her Name Customer Inserts Name of Tutor Customer Inserts Grade/Course (Date) Annotated Bibliography 1. Shore, C. (2010) Building Europe: The Cultural Politics of European Integration (London: Routledge). The book discusses the elements of sovereignty that are undermined by integration of The European Union. It discusses the belief history of the union from the signing of the Rome treaty in 1957 to the Lisbon treaty in 2007.The author is authoritative and credible as he cites the various stages and steps of negotiations that took place. He contrasts the theory of integration that is advanced by Haas with the national identity crisis. On the basis of the integration theory he argues that the European Union will continue to be strong as it is impossible for a single member state to pull out without facing severe consequences. However there is no single time in the near future that citizens of member states of The European Union will cease to see themselves as citizens of their nations and view themselves as citizens of Europe. The author is quite insightful and is not biased at all since he tries to balance both points of view. The work is relevant to the issues under discussion since it takes the reader through the history of the union and even offers backgrounds to the ideology of the various scholars who have advanced theories on European integration. The source was published in 2010 making it quite relevant and informative since it reviews the historic situation and contrasts it with the current situation. It was published as a means of comparison of the theories of integration. 2. Hooghe, E. and G. Marks. (2005) ‘Calculation, Community, and Clues: Public Opinion and European Integration’. European Union Politics, Vol. 6, pp. 419-43. Hooghe and Marks argue that that the mechanisms applied in formation of the European Union led to integration but failed to lead to loss of national identity. They take us back to the years before the signing of The Rome treaty when the Federalists convened a conference in The Hague where they intended to come up with a federal state with a similar constitution in order to curb nationalism. It was however too late since states had already established their national identities. The meeting of the congress led to formation of The European council which has been fundamental in creation of European Institutions and formulation of policies for the union. The authors are biased since they focus too much on the theory of integration and ignore the equally important theory of national integration. They also concentrate on the theories without giving a broad insight into the history of the union. The source is relevant to the study since the reader is able to understand the significance of the integration theory and why The European Union is perhaps the strongest regional block in the world. The issue of a common market and common currency is also explored giving the reader an insight into the economic aspect which was crucial to the formation of the union. The source was published in 2005 and therefore covers a broad period of existence of The European Union. It was established to shed light on the factors behind the strength of the European Union. 3. Thernborn, G. (2009) European Modernity and Beyond (London: Sage). Thernborn discusses the feeling of the citizens of the member states of the union about integration. He gives the example of the instance when Germans demonstrated due to participation of their nation in bailing out Greek during the Greek financial crisis. The author is authoritative and impartial since he gives real life scenarios to explain the strength of the national identity theory. He explains why a national identity will always prevail over a European identity. He opines that integration was successful in Europe because the governments did not lose total sovereignty as they were left in control of crucial sectors in their countries. The work is relevant to the study since the reader gets to decipher the sentiments among citizens of member states of The European Union firsthand. The theory of international Relations is explored and the differences in the points of view of the federalists and the opponents of federalism are brought to the surface. It also discusses the future of the union with the conclusion that while the European Union is here to stay the dream of a federal European Union is far-fetched. The source was established in 2009, making it relevant to the study since it was published after the Lisbon Treaty of 2007.The book was published to generate a discussion on the future of The European union and the events that are likely to occur. Part B Introduction Integration of Europe is one of the most phenomenal developments that have been witnessed in the 20th Century. It is a process that has been characterized by surrendering some aspects of national sovereignty selectively. The integration process was triggered in the 1950s when six nations in Europe commenced a joint control initiative of their steel and coal industries. The industries were to be regulated by a higher authority. In the 1960s tariffs on most of commercial products and services were eliminated followed by appointment of a common agent to represent them in multi-lateral and international trade negotiations. In the 1970s the membership increased and the countries embarked on a mission to stabilize a mutual exchange rate1.Membership continued to increase in the 1980s and the member countries agreed to eliminate trade barriers in relation to trade activities conducted amongst them. In the 1990s the membership expanded exponentially with several countries joining.The majority of the member countries stopped using their national currencies with the objective of forming a common monetary union. The European Union therefore has its foundation on a common customs union and a common commercial market. It thus started as a union with a narrow scope of authority and six member states who signed the Rome Treaty in 1957.From the signing of The Rome treaty in 1957 to the treaty of Lisbon in 2007, it has grown exponentially resulting in legal, political and economic integration and an increased membership of 27 countries2.The integration of Europe has set a precedent internationally since it has happened peacefully without coercion or violence making it an enigma in geo-politics of the world. Discussion The founders of the European Union rationalized that once they achieved economic integration, political integration would follow automatically. This theory was advanced by Ernst Haas and is known as the theory of regional integration. The theory argued that cooperation among member states would result in a “spillover”. He explained a “spillover” as circumstances that were not foreseen which would flow from the integration process resulting in a higher level of cooperation and a unitary system of making laws. Since Brussels would be the centre for making laws and policies for the union more players such as governments, firms, companies, citizens, trade unions and political parties would be bound politically and socially by the laws developed by The European Union3. According to Haas the policies and rules issued by The Union would slowly come to be accepted by citizens who would turn their patriotism and loyalty to the union. Their values, beliefs and aspirations of the citizens would converge resulting in unity among the people in the countries in turn generating a new European nationalism4.Haas asserted that the future of The European Union lay in the extent to which members of the member countries came to view themselves as citizens of the wider European region. By 1970s when the economic and political projects of the founders of the union grinded to a halt, Haas gave up on his integration theory and rendered it obsolete citing the fact that development in the globe had overtaken it. His theory however continued to hold water when in the 1980s The European union was launched afresh and various projects were initiated such as: Creation of The Euro; a single European market; cohesive political structure; and the Schengen agreement. Cooperation of the member states thus expanded geographically and functionally5. The member states also concurred on the need to reform several institutions which would make political agreements much easier to make. The European Parliament became very powerful and the principle of democratic representation of the people was entrenched in The European Union. The power of The European Court of Justice also expanded significantly. The Treaty of Rome was constitutionalized and the rules, laws and regulations of The European Union were enforced. The court was able to cover a wider scope and reach a wider audience. The improved cooperation was not widely supported by the public in the various member states of The Union. Though they were supportive of participation by the governments they did not express a desire for shared politics or a common European identity. The financial crisis witnessed by the world in 2007 lessened the sense of a common European Identity which was weak in the first place. Factors such as the war on terrorism, immigration issues, the monetary crisis and slow growth in the economic sector led most citizens to reject the idea of deriving identity and political beliefs from the European Union, choosing instead to accord this status to their national governments. This gave rise to the national identity theory. The issue of national identification played out significantly during demonstrations held in Greek and Germany during spring in 2010.There was a financial crisis in Greek and the government resorted to The European Central bank for assistance. The bank responded that the only way Greece could secure assistance is only if it undertook a strict austerity policy. Germany was willing to provide the largest bail out for Greece. German citizens held the view that the Greece and their government were extravagant and protested the participation of the German government in the bailout. The Greece took to the street to protest objection by Germany6.The theory of national integration thus triumphed over the theory of integration in that the citizens valued their national identity more than they valued cooperation among member states of The European Union7. Expansion of the European Union has caused an identity crisis in Europe. There are those citizens who have adopted a European identity as a result of legal, economic and social integration while there are those citizens who view expansion of the union as a threat to sovereignty, autonomy and national identity. The European Union is highly integrated economically making it impossible for any member state to leave while national identity issues pose a dilemma for governments since they have to follow EU policies and institutional directives. The member states of The European Union therefore have to coordinate fiscal policies in such a manner that they do not conflict with identity concerns raised by citizens. The integration theory is closely related to the international relations theory. The theory asserts that European Integration was kick started by the signing of The Treaty of Paris in 1951 by the governments of Netherlands, Italy, Germany, France, Belgium and Luxembourg. The signature meant that the economies of the particular states would be managed in a common manner. The governments gave up some aspects of national sovereignty such as making legislation on some issues and chose to make the decisions jointly with other governments. It also involved delegation of tasks to European authorities and institution. The surrender of sovereignty in some areas by governments in Western Europe surprised theorists of international relations in Western Europe since the nation had been the basic unit of politics in most parts of The Western world. The theorists found an explanation in the theory of political integration as advanced by Haas.The theorists stated that the political integration of Europe was a process whereby politicians in various member states would be convinced to shift their interests, loyalties and activities towards The European Union as a new political centre as it has higher jurisdiction over individual member states, The European Union would thus become one federal state8 The federal state would develop because the member states would not be able to conduct domestic and foreign services independently as they would have to rely on each other. Decisions would have to be made jointly or they would be delegated to institutions in The European Union in which member states would appoint or elect representatives. This led to emergence of two competing international relation theories; Lindberg’s neofunctionalism and Hoffman’s intergovernmentalism9.The functionalists main argument is that the European Union was formed as a means of avoidance of war among nations, the same idea that informed the formation of The United Nations. It happened after the Second World War in order to ensure peace in the world by first ensuring peace in the regions. Nationalism was the main cause of war since most citizens were willing to give their life in order to defend their nations. The League of Nations failed because it involved formation of an international union without unity of the nations in the regions. To address this failure, nations in the same region had to have a closer relationship before forming an international organization. The neofunctionalists opposed the idea of a federal government because it would pose a threat to both individual and national freedom. They were of the view that formation of federations would create identities resulting in nationalism of a larger magnitude. The European Union was formed to in order to unite nations to make attainment of social and economic objectives easier and more efficient among member states10.Governments were more willing to endorse the idea since it did not result in complete loss of sovereignty as they would retain control over some affairs of the nation. The federalists on the other hand argue that the European Union was formed in order to transfer sovereignty and authority from state governments to one authority. This resulted to formation of The European Union of Federalists in 1946.The founders opined that federalism would supersede nationalism and ensure peace in the region. If nations were left to govern themselves, they would reconstruct the old order and war would break out again. Nations would renew old rivalries and jealousies and war would become an inevitable end11.The federalists wanted a federal constitution that would govern Europe to be drawn. By the time the congress for the federalists was formed, it was too late as national governments had already been formed. The congress met in The Hague in 1948 whereby The Council of Europe was formed since it was impossible to form a European federation.12The federalists conceded and the European formed the first European institution which was The European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) which drafted the Schuman plan which contained guidelines on post-war reconstruction of states in Europe and modernization of European economies. The plan emphasized on the need to create large common market and creation of supranational institutions that would serve all the member states of The European Union. The institutions would formulate general economic policies and rational procedures of planning that would be adopted across Western Union13. Conclusion The debate of the integration process of The European Union is still going on and it may never come to a conclusion. Concepts keep springing over happenings that have taken place since the signing of The Rome Treaty in 957 up to the signing of The Lisbon Treaty in 2007.The debate centers around the roles that state governments ought to play in the union and whether there is a possibility of complete loss of sovereignty. There are those who argue that integration took place automatically while others argue that it was a controlled and regulated process. There are those who support integration on basis that an European identity is important and those who oppose it on grounds that it will result in loss of national identity. In spite of the conflicting theories, integration of The European Union has been successful, and the world stamped its mark of approval when the union was awarded the Nobel Prize last year. References Betz, H. (2005) Radical Right-Wing Populism in Western Europe. Basingstroke: Macmillan. Brubaker, R. (2007) Nationalism Reframed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bruter, Michael. (2008) ‘Winning Hearts and Minds for Europe: The Impact of News and Symbols on Civic and Cultural European Identity’. Comparative Political Studies, Vol. 36, No. 10, pp. 1148-79. Case, H. (2009) ‘Being European: East and West’. In Checkel, J. and Katzenstein, P. (eds) European Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Deflem, M. and Pampel, F. (2006) ‘The Myth of Post National Identity: Popular Support for European Unification’. Social Forces, Vol. 75, pp. 119-43. Fligstein, N. (2008) Euro clash: The EU, European Identity, and the Future of Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Gabel, M. (2008) Interests and Integration. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. Haas, E. (2007) ‘International Integration: the European and the Universal Process’. International Organization, Vol. 15, pp. 366-92. Habermas, J. (2004) ‘Citizenship and identity: Some reflections of the future of Europe’. Praxis International, Vol. 12, pp. 1-19. Hooghe, E. and G. Marks. (2005) ‘Calculation, Community, and Clues: Public Opinion and European Integration’. European Union Politics, Vol. 6, pp. 419-43. Maier, J. and Rittberger, B. (2008) ‘Shifting Europe’s Boundaries: Mass Media, Public Opinion and the Enlargement of the EU’. European Union Politics, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 243-67. Shore, C. (2010). Building Europe: The Cultural Politics of European Integration. London: Routledge. Thernborn, G. (2009). European Modernity and Beyond. London: Sage. Read More