Does the EU Need Politicization - Essay Example

The politicization of the European Union (EU) is a critical issue of concern and contemplation for policy analystsand political scientists which essentially focus upon the political dynamics of the region as a source of their analysis and how these changes can impact the progress of EU member states. However, the events which followed the collapse of the Constitutional Treaty thereby, restricting the participation of the EU’s citizens in decision making have been characterized by the emergence of possibly equitable apprehensions regarding the implications of the politicization of EU integration (De Wilde and Zurn, 2012). The fundamental question which must be addressed before embarking upon the launch of measures to politicize the EU is rather straightforward and is rooted in a legitimate concern of the stakeholders which are somehow affected by the functioning of the politico-economic union of several European nations. This question aims to explore whether the EU essentially needs and require politicization. For the purposes of comprehensively and critically examining this fundamental aspect, this paper integrates positions of renowned scholars on the topic so as to reach at objective and viable conclusions with regard to inquiry. According to De Wilde and Zurn (2012), the onset of politicization is a direct outcome of the rising power and authoritative position which is currently possessed by the EU. It should be noted with reference to this claim that the possible increase in this authoritative stature of the union has been prompted by two critical events – the failure of the Constitution Treaty and the inception of the financial crisis which hit the region. For scholars such as Statham and Trenz (2012), the agenda of politicization has reached a stage where its effects can be characterized as palpable and where its eventual progression appears to be foreseeable. Despite of these observations it is important to identify whether this particular measure appears to be the only viable and feasible answer for effectively resolving the problems of the European Union? In their comprehensive and insightful research on the issue of politicization surrounding the European Union (EU), Magnette and Papadopoulos (2008) adopt a neutral stance on the position of renowned scholars Hix and Bartolini and rightly classify the issue of EU’s politicization as a supposed solution for the imminent problems which are being faced by the union. This notion postulates that rather than blatantly disapproving or approving of this particular measure it is important to view it amongst a larger scheme of ideas and events before it is decided if this approach can be deemed as correct or erroneous. However, before examining the discussion and recommendations of Magnette and Papadopoulos (2008) on the matter, it is imperative to specifically assess the positions of Hix and Bartolini. According to Hix (2006) the notion of eventual politicization is unavoidable and foreseeable with regard to the functioning of the European Union (EU) because of the innate structure of the politico-economic model. This view asserts that despite of the founding fathers’ conscious efforts to establish a system which would be able to combat the advent of politicization and political agendas in the long-run, the essence of involving autonomous regulatory establishments in this combination is what has potentially led the EU towards the risk of exposing itself to political schema and objectives. However, the development of independent bodies for conducting regulation is directly contested by what can be identified as ‘majoritarian’ bodies. As stated by Hix (2006, p. 5): “If regulatory policies are made by ‘majoritarian’ institutions, like parliaments or elected governments, these institutions would have incentives to use these policies to benefit their own supporters”. However for Hix (2006), a critical consideration in the exploration of the functioning of regulatory institutions given the present challenges faced by the region is much different as compared to previous decades. This case eventually develops the idea that even if the EU’s policies are separated from those of independent regulatory establishments, either of the alternatives does not grant the citizens of the region with all-around, guaranteed benefits because victors and failures are bound to exist in the case of both scenarios (Hix, 2006). The development of Hix’s (2006) argument on the politicization of the EU is not only rooted in suggesting that the establishment requires politicization because it is inevitable and therefore, it should be accepted as a sound choice. However, the scholar’s position in this case also refers to the explanation of factors which support the integration of a political dimension within the EU. This argument is supported by the provision of three points which support the claim. The key perspective possessed by Hix (2006) outlines the notion that the integration of politics can in fact aid the effective implementation of policies by conquering the issues which are rooted in the presence of institutional deadlock and thereby, limit the chances of effectively launching policies and frameworks to address issues. Moreover, Hix’s (2006) support for the EU’s politicization is rooted in the promotion of competition and rivalry amongst political contenders which the scholar believes would lead to ‘policy innovation’ to capture the attention of citizens. Also, the stance of Hix (2006) which advocates politicization is also forwarded by the fact that increased political participation is likely to correlate with a rise in levels of responsibility and accountability for current decision makers. On the other hand, in comparison with Hix’s (2006) depiction of a left-right division with reference to the prospects of the EU’s politicization, Bartolini’s (2006) approach is centered towards understanding the potential risks which are involved in welcoming the emergence of a political dimension to the structure of the union. The most important stakeholder that may be impacted negatively if a campaign to politicize EU fails are the citizens of the member states. As noted by Bartolini (2006) it is not definite whether left-right politicization would yield the expected results and eventually a decision to grant the EU with a political dimension would enhance the general public’s expectations from the potential outcomes of the reforms. However, any unsuccessful attempt towards realizing the set goals which are developed by a political body in relation to EU’s future campaign would lead to the emergence of general aggravation amongst citizens (Bartolini, 2006). Perhaps, the most critical observation which has been made by Bartolini (2006) in relation with exploring the prospects of politicizing EU recognizes the inherent weaknesses in the structural formulation of the establishment and identify that the union may not be able to cope with the arrival of political agendas because of these limitations. This perspective asserts that the EU’s present dispossession of a reliable political framework implies that the establishment will most likely not be able to manage the integration of politicization and successfully translate agendas into attainable objectives (Bartolini, 2006). Henceforth, any potential measures to promote politicization may work against the betterment of the institution and in fact work towards advancing its disintegration. Magnette and Papadopoulos (2008) synthesize the assertions of Hix (2006) and Bartolini (2006) to recommend whether the solution of politicization can effectively work towards addressing the issues which are faced by the region. The most important critique of Hix’s (2006) work which has been advanced by Magnette and Papadopoulos (2008) is based on the comprehension that the scholar’s claim regarding the movement of EU towards a left-right division can be challenged and classified as invalid because of a lack of concrete evidence to suggest the same. Secondly, the scholars also disregard Hix’s (2006) postulation that political contestability can promote legitimacy, accountability and responsibility because of the innate structural framework of the union. Similarly, in his critique of critique of Hix’s (2006) position, Quermonne (2006) has raised comparable concerns which are rooted in suggesting that the scholar’s analysis is based upon pre-conceived notions and conjecture which does not essentially reflect the depth of political science theory. More importantly, references to left-right division in Hix’s work hold little worth in the true sense of political science application because they ignore the potential of recognizing the progress which can be attained by working towards an integration process (Quermonne, 2006). Accordingly, it is also important to highlight that this specific position on exploring the possibility of politicization only draws from a traditional context of political thinking which aims to understand EU from the standpoint of a state rather than an organization which is responsible for accommodating the citizens of several member states (Quermonne, 2006). However, Bartolini’s (2006) examinations are characterized by the presence of an innate idea which claims that politicization would only contribute towards the diminishment of the structure; however, the author fails to appreciate the true extent of the impact of politicization in contributing towards the weakening of the model. The conclusion which can be drawn from the research and recommendations of Magnette and Papadopoulos (2008) prefers adopting a middle ground between the position of Hix and Bartolini (2006, p. 22) by favoring the advancement of “…consociational patterns of politicization”. However, in the process of adopting this standard certain important considerations must not be overlooked. In this case, the research recommends integrating several institutional defenses which could compliment the structure of the EU and work in sync with the union. Moreover, this process must also be maintained by aiding the integration of a system or framework which encourages direct contribution and involvement that is reminisce of a democratic setup but does not strictly abide by adopting each principle of the political model of governance. Following the downfall of the Constitutional Treaty of the EU, the event emerged as a strong moment of reflection for political scientists and policy analysts regarding the future course of action for managing the union. According to Moravcsik (2006) the course of action which has led to the politicization of EU cannot be blamed on an external factor or force because it has been largely inflicted upon itself by the EU. Henceforth, in the present scenario the most obvious solution which appears to be viable for addressing this issue is to focus on conducting a deeper integration of political agendas within the EU structure. However, for Moravcsik (2006) the probable course of action which may emerge as comparatively effective during this scenario is to remain committed to the current constitutional reforms rather than promoting politicization for the sake of granting EU with a facet of democracy. Moreover, Moavcsik (2006) notes that another measure which could be adopted to alleviate the current issues is to embark upon a process of depoliticization as the movement of politicization is not desirable for the Union. References De Wilde, P., & Zürn, M. (2012). Can the Politicization of European Integration be Reversed?*. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 50(s1), 137-153. Magnette, P., & Papadopoulos, Y. (2008). On the politicization of the European consociation: A middle way between Hix and Bartolini. Hix, S. (2006). Why the EU needs (left-right) politics? Policy reform and accountability are impossible without it. Politics: the right or the wrong sort of medicine for the EU, 1-27. Bartolini, S. (2006). Should the Union be ‘Politicized’. Prospects and Risks. Quermonne, J. L. (2006). Politics: The Right or the Wrong sort of Medicine for the EU?. Notre Europe. Moravcsik, A. (2006). What can we learn from the collapse of the European constitutional project?. Politische Vierteljahresschrift, 47(2), 219-241. Statham, P., & Trenz, H. J. (2012, January). The politicization of the European Union: from constitutional dreams to Euro-Zone crisis nightmares. In 3rd International Conference on Democracy as Idea and Practice, Oslo (pp. 12-13). Read More