European model, EU european union, european institutions, solidarité des faits, referendum, maastricht treaty, national sovereignty, lisbon treaty
The notion of "solidarité des faits" has always been the core of the EU, and the idea was that an integrated EU would grow step by step, and that it would unite people.
However, there was a debate about the final goal of the EU: it should go above the way to what is a federation, but should never publicly say it.
[...] Second problem: widening EU II)Widening Europe: a weakening of the Decision-Making Power The idea of deepening the EU before enlarging it did not work except for 2 points (monetary system and Schengen) conditions to reach a decision: 55% of the member states have to agree Those 55% must represent 65% of the EU population means that the small countries cannot, by themselves, bring a decision Means that a little less than 2/3 of the EU has to agree (which works better than with the rule). If the 2/3 is not reached, the project is blocked. Fully applicable only in 2017 In counterpart, a little more than 35% of the EU population has a vital power in the blocking of a project. [...]
[...] This is probably the main reason why the EU project was rejected. After 2005 the question was : what do we do now ? The idea of a federation was totally dead. The problem is that the more extreme positions are winning more and more votes nowadays, which means that the pro-EU sentiment is weakening. Decisions became more and more difficult to make. The EU constitution was supposed to solve that problem. But the project was rejected. In order to find a minimal solution, there was a negotiation in 2007 to adopt the Lisbon Treaty. [...]
[...] The project was simply rejected by the French elective and the Dutch. During the decades people were quite pro-european but were not consulted. When they finally were, about "what's next The answers were very different from one country to another. Why such a change occured ? A national sovereignty opinion appeared. Traditionnaly, national sovereignty protection came from the right but it was not enough to create a majority. What made the difference is that this national sovereignty idea appeared also in the left, many of the left electuaris decided that the EU was dangerous because it was too liberal. [...]
[...] III)The fall of the European Dream? The EU dream has failed in any clear and global project. A project was mentioned in the 80's : EU as a wield power (more or less like the USA). But this project is dead, except perhaps in the exchange markets, as the Euro is a strong monetary power. But it does not make EU powerful, as it does not have military power and policy power. There was also the idea of the Euro as a harbour for prosperity : the economic growth within the EU would be better than the outside. [...]
[...] The problem is that if we avoid talking about the final goals of the EU project, and if for that reason we forget to ask people about their will, it means that we avoid democracy. If there is no debate among the people and very few decisions given to them, then no democracy. The very idea of "solidarité des faits" was also a policy of "fait accompli", there is no choice. Integreation is made, and there is no need for any popular support. This worked well until the end of the 80's : in the few referendum that were held, people were strongly pro european. [...]
APA Style reference
For your bibliographyOnline reading
with our online readerContent validated
by our reading committee
