European Integration - Research Paper Example

Introduction Memorandum on the Organization of a Regime of European Federal Union may be seen as the advent of European integration. The memorandumwas produced for the French government as a proposal for European Union in 1930. As such European integration can therefore be said to be the process of cooperation of the European states and those sates that are partly in Europe. The integration is on legal, political social and even economical platforms. The integration is achieved through what is commonly called the European Union and European council. The integration which requires that there is cooperation in the already mentioned platforms is rooted in the commitment of each member state in making the integration not only a reality but also a working reality. The European member states have made choices to be in the union and as such there are other choices that they have made to make the union or integration function. This paper seeks to support the proposition that history of European integration has been shaped by the rational choices made by national governments. The paper starts by highlighting the history of the European Integration at the same time showing some of the rational choices that have been made by the national governments in the member states to the success of the European integration through EU and EC and moves on to consider the theories of integration that are applied to make the rational choices of the member states enhance the better functioning of the European integration. History of the European Integration As mentioned earlier, the European integration has been made possible by the European Union and the European council. European Council The Second World War had ended in 1945 and the effects were devastating. The economies were shattered, there was resentment against the enemies, people died etc. Generally, the outcomes of the war were negative. Therefore, there was need for reconciliation and this need was able to bring forth the idea of European integration. The national governments saw that the enmity that had taken them to war had to be buried with the end of the war and forge new relations through integration and union. This was a rational choice in deed. The idea of European integration in turn led to the formation of the European Council in 1949. The University of Zurich Speech offered by Winston Churchill in 1949 called for the creation of the United States of Europe through the institutionalization of the Council of Europe (Wendell, 1998). This speech called on the European states to make rational choices and integrate their efforts to the formation of the European council. The Council's main achievement was seen in 1950, exactly one year after inception, when it held the first European Convention on Human Rights where the European Court of Human Rights was formed and stationed in Strasbourg. This court was to be the major de facto Supreme Court for both the human rights and fundamental freedoms throughout the entire Europe. Other institutions that have since been conceived under the European Union have been the Committee for the Prevention of Torture and the European Social Charter which help protect the human right throughout Europe (Cini, 2007: pp86-89). It is important to note that the European Council holds most of its conventions which are mostly focused on the achievement of legal integration. The legal integration is possible through conventions on legal assistance on issues such as corruption, doping in sports, money laundering and internet crimes among other legal issues. There has also been cultural cooperation under the council. For instance, the 1954 Cultural Convention and other subsequent conventions which focused on issues such as university studies and diplomas as well as the development of minority languages was a clear demonstration of Cultural integration and cooperation. The member state had to cooperate to support this initiative of cultural integration under the umbrella of the European Council (Simai, 1994: pp302-305). The European Council had to get membership from a number of states. The states were never forced to accede to the council. They were supposed to make choices whether or not to join the council. The choice to join the council by the European member states is purely a rational choice and the decisions made in the council has the participation of the member states under the dictates of the intergovernmentalism, Neo-functionalism and supranationalism. The decision making functions of the council is heavily dependent on these above mentioned theories of integration. Immediately after the fall of the Berlin wall, most of the communist states in the Central and Eastern Europe decided to consent to the Council of Europe and as such they were able to join. Now, the European Council has a membership of 47 states in Europe except Belarus which lacks democracy in its national government. This therefore has one implication; the fact that European Integration has been able to be achieved under the European Council because it has covered the entire European continent. It is imperative to note the fact that the European Council is able to function purely as a result of the concurrence to its conventions by the member states. Similarly, the functioning of the council is enhanced through political coordination seen through ministerial conferences and what is commonly known as the inter-parliamentary sessions. The council has always worked hard to achieve greater heights of unity especially on issues such as democracy, governance, human rights, legal matters etc. European Union The European Union (EU) is a bit smaller than the European council which is a 47 member international establishment. Treaty of Maastricht in 1993 was able to give birth to the EU which was grounded on the already existing European Economic Community. The economic community was made up of 12 states which have since been termed as the founding members of the EU. These states are Netherlands, Germany, Belgium, Luxembourg, Denmark, Italy, Spain, France, Ireland, Portugal, Kingdom and Greece. Other states such as Sweden, Finland and Austria were able to join EU in 1995. Cyprus, Latvia, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia, Estonia, Czech Republic, Lithuania and Malta joined the EU in 2004 and Bulgaria and Romania joined EU in 2007 with the countries like Turkey, Croatia and Macedonia are the present candidates destined to join the EU soon. It is imperative to note that the EU in its entirety; parliaments, judges, secretariats, commissioners and the governments of the member states all have key roles to play to ensure that there is increased unity in the entire coverage of the EU. However, what has remained questionable is who actually plays a key role in the functions of the EU. Many theories of integration have been put forth to help explain and answer the foregoing question. These theories shall be dealt with in the following sections. The complexity of the EU is amazing and this is why it needs to have sober leadership to enable it function well. EU has relationships with other states that are not members in EU's intention to having a number of states sharing in EU's democratic ideals to be further integrated without the necessity of being full members of EU. As such, there is need for an elaborate decision making organ in the EU which will help make legislation on various issues affecting member states as well as those that affect non-member. The decisions in EU are made through the dictates of a number of theories of economic integration such as intergovernmentalism, Neo-functionalism and supranationalism (Richardson, 2006: pp73-75). Theories of Integration It is common knowledge that working with numerous states together will possibly bring about conflicts of interests, conflicts over control as well as conflict over who should make major decisions of the union. As such the union functions are enhanced or hampered depending on the structure of control and management of the union. A number of theories of integration have been put forth based on this submission. The theories try to show how harmony, unity and grater efficiency in carrying out the functions of the union can be achieved. The initial theories were more focussed on how to prevent war between the member-states otherwise called as the nation-states. For instance the Federalism and Functionalism were among the very first theories of integration and they proposed the containment of the nation-states. Transactionalism theory on the other hand focussed on the stabilization of the nation-state system. The Neo-functionalism is one of the most influential theories of the European Integration. The theory was developed by Ernst Haas and investigated and further developed by Leon Lindberg in 1958 and 1963 respectively (Haas, (1958: pp111-123). Worth noting is the heavy debate between the theories of neofunctionialism and intergovernmentalism. Of great importance is the debate on how the participation of the member states in making rational choices can lead to the development of the union. Actually, the debate(s) have remained quite central in the understanding of the development, achievements and failures of the EU or EC for that matter. As time has passed, there has been great evolution on the theories and as such there has been a shift in the understanding of the European Integration. The focus of emphasis has changed from prevention of war between the member states to the complexity of policy making function of the union. There is also the concept of Multi-level governance (MLG). As such there have been new theories that try to explain the working and development of the EU and/or EC (Rosamond, 2000: pp123-127) Intergovernmentalism What is intergovernmentalism This is a very important question that has to be asked if one needs to understand the working of the European integration. Intergovernmentalism simply refers to the decision-making method in most international organizations whereby power is held on a shared basis by a large number of member states. Decisions under this theory are not always made unanimously. There are independent individuals who are appointed or elected by the member governments (hence the name intergovernmentalism) who have advisory and /or implementation responsibilities to play in the international organization. The stand taken by these individual is a representation of the government and as such the stand of the states he/she represents. Most of these stands can be seen in scenarios where voting is necessary especially when specific policies in conventions are to be passed. As such, the votes of the member states, represented by individuals appointed or elected by these governments count a lot in the policy and decision making function of these international organizations such as the European union and the European Council which represent the European integration. As such, the achievements and failures of the EU or/and EC and hence the European integration depend entirely on the rational choices that the member states take. These choices are deliberated upon by the arms of government before being communicated to the representative in EU or EC to be passed on as a vote or stand. This therefore means that the rational choices that the member states have had to make have all through shaped the past and even the present of the European integration. In the context of EU or and EC (both represent European integration) the concept of Intergovernmentalism refers to a situation where the member states ratify the legislation and /or executive decisions either by majority vote or unanimity. Once the legislations and /or executive decision have been passed by majority vote or unanimity they assume a binding orientation and each member state is under the obligation to ratify these legislations and/or executive decisions. It is imperative to note that these legislations and/or executive decisions do not pass through national parliaments except in a situation where there is need for an amendment of an already existing EU or EC treaty. The Headquarters of EU are in German and there are measures that have been taken to ensure that there is no interference of EU parliament with the German federal system. Through these measures, the practice of intergovernmentalism does not in any way interfere with or /and affect the federalism in the member states. As mentioned earlier, intergovernmentalism is a method of decision making in international organizations such as the EU and EC and the opposite of this decision making method is what is commonly known as supranationalism. Intergovernmentalism in as far as the European integration is concerned is the theory which was embraced the moment neofunctionialism was rejected. Neofunctionialism suggested the control of national governments in not only the level but also the speed and direction of the European Integration. The theory of intergovernmentalism takes the national governments of the member states as the main actors in the European Integration but not at all the definite controllers of the level, speed and direction of European Integration. The approaches made by this theory are able to explain both the radical changes and inertia in European Integration as a result of the convergence and divergence of national interests respectively (Kaspersen & Andersen, 2003: pp235-237). Neofunctionalism As intimated earlier, neofunctionialism suggested the control of national governments in not only the level but also the speed and direction of the European Integration. It was suggested by Ernst B. Haas. As a theory of regional integration, the theory can be analyzed in the light of European integration the theory looks at the integration as inevitable as opposed to a desirable venture. It has often been believed that the strength of this theory is also its weakness. It reckons that European Integration or any other regional integration for that matter can only be achieved through an incremental process but strikingly enough it conceptualizes the process of integration as a linear process underscores the very strength of the theory because this concept of the integration process fails to explain the setbacks that often face regional integration (such as the European Integration). The theory strongly believes that there is a functional spill-over that occurs from social integration and cooperation into the national political realms. These spill over require that the national governments take part in the shaping of the European Integration. The theory further asserts the role the supranational institutions have played in the European Integration. These institutions have been behind the European Integration trying to not only reinterpreting the agreements of Intergovernmental conventions but also increase the mandate of the EU legislation to new and varied areas. However, the more practical theory of intergovernmentalism has proven that the national governments can and have immensely participated to shape the European integration. The spill over theory suggested by the neofunctionalism is quite unacceptable to the proposers of the intergovernmentalism theory (Alexander, 1998: pp89-92). Supranationalism This theory is divergent from what the popular intergovernmentalism suggests. This theory suggests a power transfer to a specific authority which is broader than the governments of the member states that build the European integration. This theory takes away the running of the integration from the member states giving it to one broader authority which makes decision by majority votes and as such it is possible that a member state is likely to be made to ratify an agreement that it doesn't agree to. As far as the European Integration is concerned, the supranationalism theory has found application. A good example is when the six founder states came together to achieve a major goal; making war among the member states not only unconceivable but also materially impossible. They set out to accomplish this goal by putting the most important interests such as coal and steel production under one common authority which was broken down into a number of common institutions. As such it became quite difficult for the member countries to even think of going into war. Such very rational choices have made the European Union what we see it today; a successful European integration on a number of interests ranging from social to economic, political to cultural matters etc. Conclusion In conclusion, it is indeed true that the rational choices the national governments have made in the past have helped immensely to shape the history of the European Integration. This is specifically so when the theory of intergovernmentalism was applied. In as much as the other theories of Supranationalism and Neofunctionalism helped give direction to the integration, intergovernmentalism did not only give direction to the integration but also expedited the integration in the chosen direction (Nugent, 2003: pp482-485). The theory also decided the level of the integration. As such, intergovernmentalism was preferred because it allowed the member states to make choices on what they will want legislated in the integration. Therefore, the control of the European integration was passed on to the national governments of the member states and thus the rational choices made by these national governments have since shaped the history of the European integration. References Haas E B, (1958): Uniting of Europe, Stanford Publishers, pp111-123 Rosamond B, (2000): Theories of European Integration Hampshire: St. Martin's Press, pp123-127 Alexander J C, (1998): Neofunctionalism and After, Wiley-Blackwell, pp89-92 O'Neill M, (1996): The politics of European integration: a reader, Routledge, pp283-285 Cini M, (2007): European Union politics, Oxford University Press, pp86-89 Richardson J, (2006): European Union: Power and Policy-making, Routledge Publishers, pp73-75 Kaspersen L B & Andersen H, (2003): Classical and modern social theory, Wiley-Blackwell, pp235-237 Nugent N, (2003): The Government and Politics of the European Union, Duke University Press, pp482-485 Simai M, (1994): The Future Of Global Governance: Managing Risk and Change In The International, US Institute of Peace Press, pp 302-305 Wendell M, (1998): "Churchill and the Unification of Europe, the Churchill Centre, retrieved on 27th April 2009 from http://web.archive.org/web/20061217175506/http://www.winstonchurchill.org/i4a/pages/index.cfmpageid=61 Read More