Tensions between Nationalism and Internationalism: European Union Curriculum Resources for Grade 11 Social Studies Classrooms in Alberta

Robert Gardner Kent den Heyer Wayne Lavold Kelsey McCready Kenneth Mouré George Richardson Jana Stejskalikova Lori Thorlakson

The development of this resource was co-funded with the assistance of the European Union. The contents of this resource are the sole responsibility of the European Union Centre of Excellence at the University of Alberta and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Commission.

© European Union Centre of Excellence, University of Alberta

Copyright material belonging to a third-party and referenced herein may have been reproduced with permission,

separately licensed, or the content has been reproduced under the fair dealing exception in the Canadian

Copyright Act. Further reproduction of the material outside the context of this publication may require

permission from the copyright owner.

HOW TO USE THIS RESOURCE

This resource is intended to aid in addressing Related Issue III of the grade eleven Social

Studies Program of Studies for Alberta. The resource focuses on the Specific Outcomes 3.1 to

3.9 under Skills and Processes as well as Skills Outcomes relating to Critical and Creative

Thinking and Communication. In anticipation of curricular changes related to “competencies

of the 21st Century Learner” this resource also addresses Critical Thinking and Problem

Solving skills by exposing students to the dilemmas inherent in membership in international

organizations, and by inviting students through various assessment tasks to consider what

nations should do when faced with a variety of challenges.

The three case studies here focus on the tensions between nationalism and internationalism as

reflected in the European Union. The case studies examine economic union, principally the

common currency; identity and questions about what constitutes national citizenship; and

environmental issues related to developing a common policy regarding climate change.

Teachers will notice that while the three case studies deal with distinct issues there is

considerable overlap and interrelatedness. The resource is flexible and adaptable: teachers

may use any or all of the case studies in any particular sequence.

Each of the three case studies includes a brief story that sets context for the issue, a

“backgrounder” section that provides historical foundation to the current EU policy under

investigation, and three assessment opportunities. The assessment pieces have built in

differentiation. Students can choose which of the three assessment tasks they would like to

engage with. The intention is that this is a five-day unit but is expandable and contractible to

accommodate the needs of individual classrooms.

Throughout this resource there are various questions, quotes from political and national

leaders, images and charts. Students are invited to engage with any or all of these by writing

in a notebook or journal; these responses would aid in preparing to complete the assessments

at the end of each case study, and for the final assessment.

Introduction: Nella Last, a housewife living in Barrow-in-Furness, England, kept a diary during World War II for the social research group Mass Observation, and her diary later became the basis for an award-winning television drama, Housewife 49. She continued her diary after the war, and recorded the harsh conditions of everyday life. Shortages of essential goods continued, especially for food and coal, and there were long queues to buy food. Bread, unrestricted during the war, was rationed starting in July 1946. Nella accepted the wartime shortages as a worthwhile sacrifice for the war effort, but she did not expect them to continue and to grow worse when the war was over. “The New Year is going to be a shock for people,” she wrote in December 1945. “Things will be very tight and on the whole more difficult than in the war years, for there will be so many more civilians and so many less things to buy.” Europe suffered vast human and material losses in WW II. The need to restore political stability and economic well-being was widely recognized in 1945. More than 40 million Europeans died in the war, more than 13 million were “displaced persons,” cities and communications networks had been damaged by bombing, and economies were producing at a fraction of their prewar levels. The challenge was enormous. How might security and basic comforts be restored to tens of millions of people in an environment of unimaginable destruction? Former competitors and enemies would need to cooperate to solve problems and improve conditions for all citizens. A balance would need to be struck between the collective interests of the whole continent and those of individual countries of distinct language, culture, resources and economic strength. One key Allied objective announced in the Atlantic Charter in 1941 was that all men in all lands should be able to live “in freedom from fear and want.” The United Nations Organization in 1945, the World Bank and IMF, and in 1947 the announcement of the European Recovery Program, were all institutions created to promote cooperation. They were intended to reorder and rebuild an international structure to foster peace and economic security. Cooperation was needed to share scarce resources, to restore trust between nations, and to foster economic growth. Consider some key issues and questions regarding the proposed large scale cooperation:

The war had been a conflict rooted in nationalism. To what extent could international institutions build cooperation without damage to national interests?

How might countries work together when some enjoyed advantages that others would not?

How would national governments respond to opportunities that would limit their national sovereignty?

Background: The path from devastation in 1945 to today’s European Union of 28 countries, with a single market and a common currency (the euro, used by 17 member states), was a path taken in small steps. It fixed attention on attainable goals rather than an ultimate destination. Economic reconstruction and relief were the immediate needs. The first steps were slow, focused on reconstruction, and on institutions to provide security for international payments and bilateral trade. By 1950, cooperation developed to coordinate the production of raw materials across borders (The European Coal and Steel Community). In 1957 the Treaties of Rome created the European Economic Community of six countries to establish a customs union, create a single market for goods, labour and capital, and provide for common commercial, agricultural and transport policies. In subsequent steps, new members joined the Community. Further integration removed barriers to the free movement of goods, labour and capital, and monetary union introduced a single currency, the euro. Member states agreed to cooperate in more challenging areas such as foreign policy, security, justice and home affairs. The member states of the European Union (as it has been called since the 1992 Treaty on European Union) have tried to solve policy problems by working together. This worked best in policy areas where the economic benefits were most obvious (such as creating a single market that every member state could access) or where the policy problems were cross-border by nature (such as environmental policy) and in rather technical matters. In these areas the European Union developed strong supranational methods of cooperation, with policy-making led by a European-level executive (the European Commission in Brussels, Belgium) and, more recently, by the European Parliament. The trade-off was that individual member states participated in policy-making, but no longer had independent sovereign power in these policy areas. Cooperation was most difficult in policy areas that are traditionally part of a sovereign state’s core functions (such as foreign policy) or in policy areas that are politically contentious (such as taxation). In these areas, the member states still cooperate, but do so in an intergovernmental style, with each state keeping the right to block common decisions by exercising a veto (e.g. foreign policy) or else by coordinating their policies in a non-binding way (e.g. economic growth policies).

What would be the driving force behind this unprecedented effort at economic and political integration?

How might national interests be affected by the limitations and responsibilities necessary for cooperation?

The European Union represents an interesting case study of the tensions between nationalism and internationalism, between cooperation and independence. Thus far the great experiment has been remarkably successful in some areas, but continues to face challenges as the Union evolves and expands in a changing world. The European Union remains a work in progress.

Economic needs alone do not explain the persistence and the extent of integration efforts. Economies had recovered and surpassed their prewar levels of output within a few years after the war. Integration continued and ambitions developed to extend integration; obstacles altered the course of integration without arresting its progress. Economic integration necessarily involves political decisions and limitations on national authority. Individual countries give up rights to determine national policies in agreeing to cooperative programs negotiated by international agreement. Integration requires sacrifices of national autonomy in exchange for benefits of cooperation and coordination to better solve policy problems. Three issues are particularly important for understanding the national interests at stake in the process of integration:

1. Economic control of the national economy in creating a common currency Completing the common market meant sharing a common currency (the euro). The European Central Bank controls the single currency. A stable and successful common currency requires the coordination of national budget policies. Budgets are still under control of national governments, but they face pressure to coordinate their policies and accept deficit and debt limits to keep the currency stable.

2. Challenges to national identity when labour can move freely across

borders. Immigration is an issue that challenges national identity. The single market means that workers from EU countries are free to move across EU borders to work in any member state. When immigration is not related to the movement of EU workers, member states control their own policies, but face pressures to coordinate policies at the European level.

3. Challenges to national economies when environmental and energy policies

are decided by international agreement. In the EU, some policy areas, like the environment, are predominantly supranational, determined at the European level. Other areas, like climate change and energy policy, are intergovernmental. They require agreement from all member states. This mix of supranational and national responsibility for policies poses a challenge for the development of national economic growth strategies. In Canada, it is sometimes difficult for governments to develop policies when they affect both federal and provincial policy areas.

CASE STUDY #1 – Economic union

Derek’s story

In the month of July, 1985 Derek decided to get away from London for a month-long holiday

in Europe. He had planned and saved for several weeks and put together a budget for his trip.

He would charge all his travel, accommodation and eating costs to his credit card in order to

keep track of expenses, but he set aside £1000 buy souvenirs or gifts for himself.

Derek went to a bank in London to purchase Belgian francs; the bank charged a 1.5%

transaction fee but he was able to get 78850 francs – plenty enough to shop with. Derek

enjoyed the mild weather and busy streets of Brussels, but after two days decided to move

onto France. Due to daily fluctuations in currency values that were common that summer the

Belgian Franc was actually worth slightly less than it had been a few days earlier; not enough

to be troublesome, but the bank in Brussels did charge 1.5% for exchanging Belgian to

French Francs. Over the next few days Derek spent many lunch hours in outdoor cafes along

the Seine but couldn’t find any gifts or souvenirs that captured his imagination. After six days

he moved on to Spain. Curiously, that week the Franc had been falling in value against the

Spanish peseta, but not a lot. A Paris bank charged a 1.5% exchange fee but Derek bought

218000 peseta, plenty enough to shop with. The historic sites in Madrid were magnificent,

but there were still no great souvenirs to be bothered with. After three days Derek moved on

to Italy. The Spanish currency was never as valuable as the Italian lira but the past week had

seen a notable drop. A Madrid bank charged 1.5% exchange fee but Derek bought 242000

lira, plenty enough to shop with. Rome was more vivid and grand in reality than in any movie

he’d seen, but Derek couldn’t bring himself to buy picture books that he could get back in

London and after a week of superb dining he chose to move on to Germany. A bank in Rome

charged a 1.5% exchange fee and the German Marks were quite a bit more valuable than the

lira. Still, DM 3666 was plenty enough to shop with. The divided Germany was remarkable,

the Berlin Wall cut through the city like a sword slashing history and culture, families and

memories. After several days of sight-seeing and strolling through Tiergarten Park, Derek

decided to head home. No souvenirs, no new clothes, and no books or coffee mugs were

bought, but it was a fantastic trip. Derek returned to London and cashed in his Marks where

the bank charged 1.5%. Without having bought so much as a single postcard Derek went

home with £852.50.

This account, based on currency statistics at the time, illustrate a problem of multiple

currencies coexisting in a relatively small trade, travel and business area. And consumers and

travelers were affected in much the same way that businesses were. Companies,

manufacturers and business people would also have to deal with the challenge of varying

exchange rates. The common currency, the Euro, came into effect in 1999 as an attempt to

solve this problem and to make travel and business more efficient.

ANALYSIS, ISSUES, PERSPECTIVES

Economic union and the creation of a single currency were intended to make commerce,

trade and travel easier; in essence, to advance the goals of international free trade. An

argument is made that if businesses and citizens could move across borders with fewer

regulations then profits and efficiencies would increase. Workers would be free to apply for

employment in any part of the Union, consumers could purchase goods and services from

anywhere without paying additional tariffs or fees. More people do more work, buy more

products and generate more income. This would benefit everyone living within the economic

union.

Although a single currency does work toward solving a problem of trade, travel and

consumerism, other challenges emerge. What if growth in Germany is particularly strong,

resulting in rapidly rising wages, costs, inflation and a need for higher interest rates? Should

Italy also expect rising costs even if many people don’t have jobs at all? The government of

Norway has such a staggeringly large savings fund that it can offer generous social programs

that France cannot.

There are other concerns about a single currency that are not even related to economics or

trade. If there is a common currency does it imply any common identity? What pictures

should be engraved into, say, the €10 or €20 or €50 notes? Are there scenes or famous people

that all Europeans would regard as representative of their culture, language or heritage?

ASSESSMENT

1. Create a promotional poster and brochure advertising a new NAFTA common

currency.

design the front and back of the bills and coins to be used

explain why the different images were chosen and what they represent

2. Stage a “press conference” role play

2 – 3 students will play the role of officials presenting a new currency and will

explain to the rest of the class how a new currency was established and what

the benefits are perceived to be

2 – 3 other students will play the role of civic or business leaders who are

opposed to the new currency explaining why we should not proceed with a

common currency

both groups of presenters should be prepared to answer questions

the rest of the students in the class will play the role of reporters who will

record arguments presented and ask questions of the presenters

3. Conduct some on-line research to find reasons for currency fluctuations.

Choose three currencies: Canada, US and one other, then compare exchange

rates

Track the value of the Canadian dollar for two weeks

CASE STUDY #2 – Migration

Andrei's Story

Andrei is twenty-three years old. For most of his life, he has suffered from abject poverty in

the small Romanian town he grew up in. In this, he is not alone. Romania and its neighbor on

the Black Sea, Bulgaria, are amongst the poorest nations in Europe. More than 20% of the

people live below the poverty line – but even that doesn't tell the whole story as poverty in

Romania is much worse than it is elsewhere. The richest 10% of Romanian citizens would be

within the poorest 10% of British wage-earners.1

Unemployment is a major problem in Eastern Europe, especially amongst young people.

Almost 1 in 4 young Romanians lack meaningful employment. This means that, for people

like Andrei, it has been difficult to begin an adult life. He has been living in his parents' home

and has been unable to purchase a car or consider marrying his girlfriend.

Life changed for Andrei this year when he and his brother, Dinu, took advantage of the rules

of the European Union's Schengen agreement and moved to Germany to find work.

Following in the footsteps of many of their friends, they became two of the over three million

Romanians who live outside of their home country in order to find a better life.

When they arrived in Dortmund, they were limited in the types of jobs that they could seek –

when Romania and Bulgaria entered the European Union in 2007, the wealthier countries put

restrictions on economic migration, fearful of what they called 'benefit tourism', when

migrants from poorer countries seek to move to nations with more advantageous social

welfare programs. But, as of 2014, those restrictions are gone and, like any other of the more

than 300 million working age Europeans, Andrei can be hired for any job in Germany.

Andrei now works as a delivery driver. He makes more in a week than he could make in six

months back home. In Romania, when he could get work, he earned less than €250 per

month as compared with more than €2800 in Germany. While the cost of living is certainly

higher in his new home, there is no doubt that Andrei lives much better than he did before.

Yet there are problems. Far from home, Andrei misses his family and sends quite a bit of his

earnings back to support them. His German, while improving, remains a barrier to integrating

into German culture. He thus spends most of his time with other Romanians. He lives in a

neighborhood that contains many other migrants from his home country where it is easier to

communicate and where he feels comfortable. Romanian food and music remain an important

part of his life.

It is this that brings him into conflict with a growing number of Germans who worry about

the economic migration into their country. They see Romanians and Bulgarians as stealing

German jobs and putting strains on the German social system, filling schools and hospitals

while applying for welfare benefits when they are not working. This concern has led, as it has

in countries around the EU, to an increase in xenophobia – a fear of foreigners, and

discrimination against economic migrants. Andrei has experienced name-calling and, a

1 Poverty in Europe: the Current Situation, Inequality Watch (26 January 2012)

http://www.inequalitywatch.eu/spip.php?article99 accessed March 10, 2014. Stats are from Eurostat, the EU's

statistics gathering arm.

couple of times, physical violence from gangs of young unemployed men who blame him and

his friends for their problems.

Yet his life is so much better than it was before. He has a small apartment of his own and is

saving for a car. He has brought his girlfriend and her young daughter to Germany and they

are thinking of getting married. In essence, because of the opportunities offered through the

Schengen Agreement, Andrei has a future

Background: the Schengen Agreement and European Migration

In 1985, the European Union began to gradually reduce, then eliminate, border controls

between their countries. This means that, for all intents and purposes, Europe operates as a

single nation in terms of international travel – no visas are required, no passports are needed

and border controls have largely disappeared.

As of 2014, 22 members of the EU and four

non-member states have signed the Schengen

Agreement (named after the small town in

Luxembourg where the agreement was signed),

with four more countries scheduled to do so in

the future. Only two EU countries have opted

out completely – Ireland and the United

Kingdom.

In this way, citizens of these countries have

become citizens of Europe. They don't have

national passports, instead carrying the passport

of the European Union issued in their own

country. The European commission argues that

“free movement of persons is a fundamental

right guaranteed by the EU to its citizens. It

entitles every EU citizen to travel, work and live

in any EU country without special formalities"2

This is a significant reduction in the national

sovereignty of member states. Throughout

modern history, one of the major powers of a national government is control over who is

permitted to enter their country and under what conditions. Under the Schengen Agreement,

governments only have this power over individuals from countries outside the 'Schengen

Area'.

But the advantages are huge. Think of the differences between travel between Canadian

provinces and to foreign countries. When you go to British Columbia or Ontario, there are no

border controls to deal with or visas to obtain. However, when you travel to a foreign country

you are required to show passport identification at a border crossing, often forcing you to

wait for hours if you are driving or face long line-ups at airports. Europeans can travel

between member states just like we can between provinces. This is more efficient and

cheaper for everyone.

2 Schengen Area (European Commission) http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/borders-

and-visas/schengen/index_en.htm accessed March 10, 2014.

The Schengen Area as of 2014

The EU's Justice Commissioner Viviane Reding told students in Belgium recently: "Today,

as European citizens... you can travel 3,000km (1,860 miles) across Europe - from Vilnius in

Lithuania to Valencia in Spain - without once stopping at a border."3

Even more importantly, the citizens of Schengen states can live and work permanently

anywhere they wish. This common labour market allows citizens access to jobs throughout

28 countries, vastly increasing options for European workers. By 2014, over 14 million

Europeans lived and worked in member states other than the one of their birth.

The basis for this was the desire to encourage the free movement of people (labour), money

(capital), goods and information throughout Europe, thus improving economic prospects for

both individual Europeans and countries as a whole. Countries that lack domestic options to

fill job vacancies benefit as they have access to a broader pool of talent. When the economy

slows in one member country, the unemployed can find work in others – such as the case

during the recent Euro crisis in which Greek, Spanish and Italian workers found employment

in economically healthier Germany, Poland, Scandinavia and the Netherlands.

The right to travel and work throughout Europe is very popular for many Europeans who

consistently rank it to be the most positive accomplishment of the EU (ahead of peace, the

Euro and democracy, in a 2013 EU survey).4

Yet it is also controversial. Borders allow for national governments to control the make-up of

their populations – for many years, this has been considered an important element of national

independence. For many European nationalists, the Schengen Agreement has resulted in a

watering down of their national cultures as well as a threat to the economic security of their

own populations. They see economic migrants as competition for jobs, social welfare

programs and spots in schools or hospitals. Germans refer to this as 'poverty migration'; in

Britain they call it 'benefits tourism'. They are angry at what the influx of people from other

cultures means for the survival of their own way of life.

The reality is that poverty does drive migration. Just as happens in Canada when one region

of the country experiences higher unemployment or lower income, people migrate to where

prospects for a better life appear greater. Alberta, Ontario and British Columbia have large

populations of Newfoundlanders and Saskatchewanians for exactly this reason. In Europe,

the movement is largely from the East to the West. Since 2004, eight Eastern European

countries have entered the European Union (most recently Romania and Bulgaria in 2007).

All of these countries are poorer and have higher unemployment than Western Europe. Thus

hundreds of thousands of people have taken advantage of the free labour market to improve

their lives.

The result has been growing xenophobia in many countries. One of the more negative

expressions of nationalism, xenophobia reflects the belief that national citizenship should be

limited to those belonging to the dominant ethnic and/or civic nation within the country.

Xenophobes generally desire to limit immigration and even to expel ‘outsiders’ from their

homeland.

Political parties that wish to restrict immigration are getting far more support throughout

Europe than they have in the past. In the 1980s, very few xenophobic parties earned as much

as 5% of the popular vote in national and regional elections. Today many of these movements

have representatives in parliaments. Some of these parties are extremist, raising fears of a

resurgence of fascism or neo-Nazism (such as the Golden Dawn party in Greece who want to

eject all non-Greeks from the country and received 7% of the vote in 2012 or the anti-Semitic

Freedom Party in Austria which denies the Holocaust and got 26% of the national vote in

3 Laurence Peter, Q&A: EU freedom of movement (BBC News Europe, Dec. 5, 2013),

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-25237742 accessed March 8, 2014. 4European Commission, Public Opinion in the European Union (Standard Europebarometer 79: Spring, 2013)

http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb79/eb79_publ_en.pdf accessed March 8, 2014.

1999). Yet the majority of the xenophobic parties are not racist. They are conservative,

traditional and democratic, but wish to limit migration in order to protect their national

culture and economy.5

Canada, as with most states, firmly controls its own immigration. There are strict rules about

who is permitted to enter the country and who is allowed to live and work here. This is

considered to be an important element of Canadian national sovereignty. Our national culture,

however, is one that encourages migration and tends to feel less threatened by the existence

of cultural diversity than is the case in some European countries. Official multiculturalism is

a key element and reflection of this. These policies appear to have worked successfully in our

country, yet this is not necessarily the case elsewhere. Britain has also attempted to promote

multiculturalism, but, in recent years, this has led to significant criticism as a ‘failed

experiment’ due to the perceived failure of many immigrants to integrate into British society.

Are such critiques present in Canada? Certainly not to the degree that they exist in Britain

and other European states. Yet evidence exists that there are many who are worried about the

influx of cultures considered ‘foreign’ to traditional Canadian culture. In 2013, the Quebec

government introduced the Quebec Charter of Values, which limited the wearing of obvious

reflections of religious belief while working for the provincial government. Since the most

evident examples of this were Muslim in nature (bourkas, nikabs and turbans), the Charter

has been criticized for discriminating against the beliefs of non-Christian immigrants.

This is a fairly mild expression of anti-immigrant beliefs and is limited to one portion of the

country (although individual viewpoints vary everywhere). However, our government

5 James Mayfield, Explaining the Rapid Rise of the Xenophobic Right in Contemporary Europe (GeoCurrents,

22 July, 2013) http://www.geocurrents.info/cultural-geography/the-rapid-rise-of-the-xenophobic-right-in-

contemporary-europe accessed March 8, 2014.

maintains control over immigration into our country. Imagine if there were a type of

Schengen agreement between the countries of North America. What might be the result?

Where would the flow of migration be? How might this change your life and the lives of

other Canadians? Given the experience of the countries of the Schengen Area, do you believe

that this would be a net benefit for Canada or a loss?

1. Diary entries of an immigrant within a Schengen-type North America –

particularly in Canada.

A Mexican, Haitian, Jamaican etc. in Canada – for a better life.

Research the standard of living and cultural beliefs in the

poorer countries as a basis for the entries.

2. Stage a role-play: Should Canada join the rest of North America in a

Schengen-style agreement?

Students as stakeholders in a parliamentary committee meeting

(Canadian workers (fear of competition for jobs), Canadian business

people (seeking hard-to-find labour), foreign nationals wanting a better

life, Canadian citizens worried about the effect on national culture,

Canadian citizens who support the diversity of multiculturalism,

Canadian nationalists concerned about the violation of national

sovereignty such an agreement would entail.

Research positions, formulate arguments. Each group would

have the opportunity to present their positions and then rebut

those of others.

Teacher would act as facilitator.

3. Students create a government public service announcement promoting the

recently signed Fredericton Agreement which created a North American

citizenship for all people living in the ten largest countries on the continent:

the United States, Mexico, Canada, Guatemala, Cuba, Haiti, Dominican

Republic, Honduras, El Salvador and Nicaragua.

Students would create an ad for a nationalist group opposing such an

agreement

Students would create a logo for the new area reflecting the

hope for the future represented by the agreement.

Arguments supporting the implementation of the agreement and

countering possible opposing arguments.

4. Students would research case study examples of xenophobia in Canada and

compare to such cases in Europe. How are they similar or different? Use the

information to postulate a thesis on whether or not a North American

Schengen-type agreement would result in similar consequences for Canada as

it has in Europe. Would there be the formation of anti-immigrant political

parties? Would there be an increase in anti-foreigner discrimination and

violence? If so, why? If not, why not? Students would demonstrate their

understanding through creating a dialogue between two Canadians – one of

which supports the idea of free immigration and the other which does not.

5. Create a character sketch of an ‘integrated North American’. Use to

demonstrate the differences between a Canadian identity and that of a North

American. Could be visual?

CASE STUDY #3 – Environmental regulations

Anatol’s Story

Anatol has been a coal miner at the Gubin, Poland coal mine for 47 years. He has worked

every day at the mine since he was 15 and his entire family’s livelihood is based on the

income from mining coal. He recently learned the Polish government is closing his mine and

he will not have a job because the government has deemed that his coal mine is not following

the European Union guidelines to deal with climate change. They have identified Anatol’s

coal mine as being too inefficient, too old and producing too much “dirty coal.” There are

also ideas floating around that the mine is closing because a nuclear power plant is going to

be constructed at the site in an attempt to follow the EU’s policies of diversifying Poland’s

reliance on coal energy.

Anatol has a number of questions about how it is even possible for his coal mine to be shut

down when it has been operating for 59 years, has substantial outputs and is helping to ensure

the country has electricity from coal. He does not understand how nuclear energy is even a

possibility when Poland relies on coal to produce more than 90% of its electricity. He also

wonders how the European Union policy on climate change and the use of nuclear energy

plants can have such a drastic impact on his family. Antol wants to know why his national

government has to be so concerned about what the European Union says about climate

change. He questions why his government has to follow policy decided by a supranational

organization that Poland is a member of? Does his government not realize the impact of

following the EU’s policy on the people of Poland and their national interest? Why can’t the

Polish government decide climate change policies that work best for the country, not ones

that have been mainstreamed from the European Union?

Anatol, upset and confused, went to a coal miners’ union meeting to try and get some

answers as to why his coal mine is closing. There was a representative from the government-

owned company, who explained that the government decided to close some mines to try and

make some concessions to the European Union’s policy on climate change and to get the area

ready for the creation of nuclear power plants. The representative told the coal miners that

the government is not in support of the EU’s policy because of the impact it will have on the

national economy, but because Poland is are a member state it has to follow the guidelines set

out. However, the Poland government is also resisting these policies arguing that it targets

the coal industry leaving the economy and Poland’s energy security vulnerable. Poland’s

government has vetoed any of the strategies the European Commission has presented

recently, because they fear that any endorsement of these targets would set the basis for

future rules that they have no choice but to follow. The long term goals to cut carbon dioxide

emissions would force Poland to stop using coal and increase the use of natural gas and

nuclear power. Anatol realizes that if these policies are ratified not only will he be unable to

find work as a coal miner anywhere, but Poland is then going to be more reliant on other

countries, like Russia and France, for energy. This could open the door to an entirely new set

of problems!

Anatol is even more angry and confused after this meeting. Sure, he understands protecting

the environment is something that he should be concerned about, but he is too busy worrying

about how his family is going to get by to even think about anything else. Although the EU’s

policy on climate change has many beneficial outcomes, the impact on the people of Poland

is not as straight forward.

Backgrounder: The European Union and Climate Change Policy

The European Union has committed to transforming Europe into a highly energy-efficient,

low carbon economy, with the goal of reducing the negative impact the EU nations have on

the world’s climate through the reduction of its greenhouse gas emissions. The European

Union has a set of binding legislation on all member states which aims to ensure all countries

in the EU meet the climate and energy targets for 2020. These targets, the “20-20-20"

targets, set three key objectives for 2020:

A 20% reduction in EU greenhouse gas emissions from 1990 levels;

Raising the share of EU energy consumption produced from renewable resources to

20%;

A 20% improvement in the EU's energy efficiency.

Under the Kyoto Protocol, most of the EU member states have committed to reducing their

collective emissions to 8% below the 1990 levels by 2012. Poland has a target of 6%

reduction. The European Commission’s climate and energy policy framework for 2030

proposes that the EU targets reducing emissions to 40% below 1990 by 2030, and for 2050

EU leaders have endorsed the objective of reducing GHG emissions by member states by 80-

95% of the 1990 levels. This target includes a roadmap for building the low-carbon

European economy. The EU has set up a number of initiatives to reduce the GHG emissions,

including an EU Emissions Trading system, within which companies receive or buy emission

allowances that cover certain percentage of carbon emissions. The number of emissions from

each sector covered by the program is limited each year to ensure that total emissions are

regulated and reduced over time. The European Commission is putting a price on carbon,

thereby giving a financial value to each tonne of emissions saved. Any company that is over

their emissions limit is heavily fined in order to facilitate investment in clean, low-carbon

technologies.

Under the Euratom Treaty, the EU is taking steps towards increasing the reliance of member

countries on nuclear power as a more energy efficient and cleaner energy alternative.

Nuclear power plants currently generate about 30% of the electricity produced in the EU

through 132 nuclear reactors in operation in 14 EU member states.6 There are three nuclear

power plants scheduled for construction in Poland, with the hope that Poland can decrease its

heavy reliance on the carbon emission intensive coal energy. As the European Commission

is focused on the safe and sustainable use of nuclear power in the member countries, many

member states have confirmed their pro-nuclear stance, despite issues that do exist with nuclear

power. The problems of long-term storage of atomic waste, the risk of reactor meltdown and the

transportation of nuclear material through the country are all issues that need to be addressed

under the EU energy protocols. Although more and more member states are switching to nuclear

power, they are also calling on the European Union not to enact a nuclear energy directive, which

would move the decision of which primary energy source a country relies on from the national level to the supranational level.

The European Union has also committed to mainstreaming the fight against climate change in

other policy areas, such as energy, agriculture, transport and in all major spending categories.

6 http://ec.europa.eu/energy/nuclear/index_en.htm

The EU argues that the key to the success of its climate change policy is that many policy

sectors need to play a part in both reducing greenhouse gas emissions and increasing societal

and ecosystem resilience to climate change impacts. By “climate-proofing” other sectors, the

EU is hoping to ensure other policy areas are able to carry on with their core tasks even

within the circumstances of a changing climate and the goal of environmental policy

integration.

Although the European Union is committed to fighting climate change, the “20-20-20”

targets set out in the 2020 climate and energy package is the only set of binding legislation.

In 2014, the 2030 framework and the 2050 roadmap have both been unable to be ratified due

to Poland’s opposition to any further progress in the EU’s climate change agenda. Poland is

resistant to any changes to the emission targets within the EU as new goals would directly

affect Poland’s energy reliance on coal, which produces more than 90% of its electricity. As

of March 2014 both the Government of Poland and the Polish Chamber of Commerce are

against the EU’s 2050 low carbon roadmap, citing that it will claim Polish jobs, cost the

Polish people €22.7 billion per year after 2050, a 10% decrease of the GDP by 2030 and a

400% increase in electricity prices after 20207 as the new protocols would force Poland to

shift from energy derived from coal to other power sources such as natural gas and nuclear.

“The effects will be catastrophic for the polish economy and budget,” said Bolesław

Jankowski, a Polish Chamber of Commerce expert and author of Warsaw’s energy strategy

between 1991 and 1995. The Polish government and utilities sector, encouraged by popular

support and the desire to secure its energy supply, are looking to domestic lignite coal

reserves. Lignite coal is a cheap way to fuel the new capacity and reduce imports of Russian

gas, however, environmental groups cite that lignite is an even “dirtier” coal to produce and

this new reliance on it would result in Poland being an even greater carbon emitting country

than before.

Poland’s opposition to new climate change policy not only prevents further development of

EU binding legislation, but also poses the question of at what point does a member nation of

the European Union have the ability to go against the nature of the EU in favour of protecting

their own sovereignty in certain policy areas? By Poland rejecting any further consensus on

climate change, is it undermining the integrity of the European Union community and future

stability of the union?

Canada’s response to climate change has been driven by its sovereignty and desire to protect

its national economy and resources. In 2002, Canada ratified the Kyoto Protocol and

undertook the legally-binding commitment to reduce its GHG emissions on average by 6%

below the 1990 levels by 2012. However, in 2011, Canada withdrew from the Kyoto

Protocol, citing that staying in the protocol would have forced Canada to spend

approximately $14 billion in carbon credits because the country was so far behind in

meetings its targets.

While Canada has since entered into other international climate change agreements, such as

the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, this act of self-determination

regarding their climate change policy and its effects on the national economy, raises key

questions similar to which Poland and the European Union is grappling with.

What is the potential risk to the international community, to which Canada is a leader in,

when a key player pulls out of a major binding agreement? Does this set the stage for any

country to exercise their government’s national interest over that of the international interest?

7 http://www.euractiv.com/climate-environment/polish-business-launches-offensi-news-

513576

To what extent does a country, whether it is an European Union member state or a sovereign

nation in the world, have the right to place their perspective of their own country’s common

good (vis-à-vis the development of their economy, industrial growth, environment or culture)

over that of the larger collective?

To what extent does a national government have the right to place their particular interest

over that of the supranational organization interest that it is a member state of?

Assessment

1. From Anatol’s perspective, write a letter to the editor of the local newspaper presenting

your opinion on the issues facing Polish’s coal miners.

2. Role- play debate/press conference: Should Canada have the ability to back out of

legally binding climate change policy in favour of the government’s perceived

national interest?

Students act as stakeholders in a parliamentary committee meeting - Canadian

MPs (including Minister of Environment, Minister of Finance), Canadian

business people (from different provinces and industries. E.g. Albertan oil

company executive), Environmentalist, Canadian nationalists concerned about

the violation of national sovereignty

Students use knowledge about Poland and the impact of their European Union

membership has on their ability to exercise their government’s perceived

national interest in regards to climate change policy

3. Create a government public service announcement promoting the move towards

nuclear energy in Poland and the ratifying of the European Union’s policy on climate

change.

4. Create a “peaceful protest speech” – Students take the perspective of the unemployed

coal miners and create a speech outlining the issues they have with the EU policy on

climate change, the impact on their government’s energy sector and economy and the

consequences for themselves and their families. Students need to explore both sides

of the issue to provide critical and thoughtful arguments to support their position.

While Britain decided to participate in the trade agreement it decided not to join the currency

union and has continued to use the Pound Sterling. Former British Chancellor of the

Exchequer and later Prime Minister Gordon Brown offered some observations about joining

the single currency. For him, a chief concern was how to deal with potential crises. If one or

two Euro zone countries faced an internal crisis all the others would be affected by it.

Deficits, growth, interest rates, investment and even home ownership in Britain would be tied

to economic problems in Spain or Greece and Britain would not be able to stabilize its own

economy. Brown also argued that since unemployment rates and government social programs

were not the same across Europe, policies in one area would not necessarily be appropriate in

another area.

WHAT CANADA WOULD DO

The idea of a common currency is an attractive one from the point of view of simplifying

travel and trade, but we have seen that it is also fraught with potential hazards. Canada and

the United States each have a single currency used by millions of people spread out over a

large geographical area, and each has a central bank and central economic policy. And some

regions enjoy stronger economic growth and prosperity than others, not unlike Europe. So

what is different in North America and why would Canada not join a currency union with,

say, the US?

In a sense, Canada can address its own economic imbalances internally in a way that Europe

cannot or does not at this time. In Canada people simply move from one region to another in

search of work or better economic opportunities. In contrast, very few citizens of one

European country live outside that country (only about 2.5% in 2010).

The dilemma of culture as seen in Europe is noted in Canada. The recently re-designed

polymer notes all reflect some element of Canadian history. If Canada joined a currency

union with the United States, would Canadians embrace currency with engravings of former

presidents rather than prime ministers, Lincoln Memorial rather than Vimy Ridge?

THE FINAL ASSESSMENT TIES BACK INTO THE THREE CASE STUDIES.

What questions does EU answer?

What would we need to give up to get what benefits to achieve union with US?

What should we learn from each other – Canada and EU?

Develop a set of symbols that would reflect Canada-US union.

Timeline 1939 Start of World War II in Europe 1945 Creation of the United Nations, International Monetary Fund and World Bank 1947 Benelux Treaty Marshall Plan speech 1948 Creation of Organization for European Economic Cooperation (OEEC), becomes

the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in 1966 1951 European Coal and Steel Community Treaty (signed by Belgium, Luxembourg,

the Netherlands, France, Germany and Italy) 1955 Messina Conference to plan the European Economic Community (EEC) 1957 Treaty of Rome 1958 Treaty of Rome comes into effect creating the EEC 1968 European Common Market fully operative 18 months ahead of schedule 1971 Member states agree to plan for Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) by 1980 1973 Denmark, Ireland and the United Kingdom join the EEC 1981 Greece joins the EEC 1985 Schengen Agreement on frontier controls (signed as the Schengen Treaty in

1990) 1986 Spain and Portugal join the EEC 1986 Single European Act signed 1990 Beginning of Stage 1 of EMU 1992 Maastricht Treaty on European Union (TEU) signed 1994 Beginning of Stage 2 of EMU 1995 Austria, Finland and Sweden join the EU 1999 Beginning of Stage 3 of EMU; euro launched as a currency of account in 11

states 2002 Euro bank notes and coin replace national currencies in 12 members of

Eurozone 2004 Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland,

Slovakia and Slovenia become members of the EU, which now has 25 member states

2007 Bulgaria and Romania join the EU 2013 Croatia become member of the EU 2013 The EU and Canada sign an agreement in principle on The Comprehensive

Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA)

Essential Terms Bilateralism – Negotiation and coordination between two nation states. Multilateralism – Negotiation and coordination among several nation states, generally for policies common to all participants. Nationalism – Focus on the interests of one’s own nation state. National sovereignty – A legal expression of the right to self-government by a state or nation. It entails the declaration by a political system to operate independently. Internationalism – Political, economic and cultural cooperation among several nation states without sacrifice of national sovereignty. Supranationalism – A sharing of sovereignty in an international institution (such as the EU) that has power delegated by nation states to decide and coordinate policies common for all members.

Glossary (alphabetical) Allies – The countries that opposed the Axis powers (Germany, Italy, Japan, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria) during the World War II. The chief Allied Powers were Great Britain, France, the Soviet Union, the United States, and China. Atlantic Charter – The joint declaration issued by F. D. Roosevelt and Winston Churchill in August 1941, resulting from a conference at sea, and setting forth the peace aims of their governments for the period following World War II. Benelux – The abbreviated name for Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg, who began common policies to integrate their economies in 1947. Bretton Woods – The resort town in New Hampshire where an international conference decided in July 1944 to create the IMF, the World Bank, and the system in order to stabilize international currency values by their exchange rates with the US dollar and thus to gold at $35 per ounce. The Bretton Woods system lasted until 1971. Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) – A monetary union with a common currency, first discussed in the Werner Report in 1970, its terms decided in the Maastricht Treaty in 1992, and the common currency, the euro, launched as an accounting unit in 1999 and as a currency in circulation in 2002. European Central Bank (ECB) – The bank responsible for monetary policy in the euro zone, based in Frankfurt. European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) – Announced in 1950, commenced operations in 1952, supranational cooperation to organize coal and steel production among six countries: Benelux, France, Germany and Italy.

European Commission – The executive body of the EU; initiates legislation and implements EU policies. European Council – Comprised of heads of state or government from member states, provides political direction for the EU. European Economic Community (EEC) – Created in 1958 to establish a customs union (no tariffs between member countries, common external tariff); the first step in economic integration for Benelux, France, Germany and Italy. It joined with the ECSC and Euratom in a common administration in 1967; known as the European Community since the 1993 Maastricht Treaty. European Parliament – Elected from member states; members serve five-year terms and sit in European party groups. Parliamentarians vote on EU legislation and approve appointments to the European Commission. European Recovery Program (Marshall Plan) – Announced by General George C. Marshall in June 1947; US aid to European countries to assist economic recovery and modernization 1947-1952. European Union (EU) – The economic and political union of member states established by the Treaty on European Union (Maastricht Treaty) signed in 1992 and in effect starting 1993. General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) – A series of trade negotiations beginning in 1947 to reduce tariffs and barriers to trade on a multilateral basis. International Monetary Fund (IMF) – An international fund established at Bretton Woods in 1944, located in Washington, DC, to provide credits to countries experiencing international payments difficulties. Treaties of Rome – Two treaties signed in 1957, in effect 1958, creating the European Economic Community (EEC) and the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom). United Nations (UN) – Established in 1945 to provide a forum for discussion to resolve disputes between nations. Its Security Council, whose purpose is to maintain peace and security amongst all countries, has five permanent members – the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Russia and China – and ten non-permanent members who are elected for two-year terms.

Images Image 1: German occupation of France: Strasbourg - Alsace, Karl Roos Platz (Place Kléber in french), 13 October 1941.

Source:http://www.crdp-strasbourg.fr/main2/albums/alsaGuerre01/index.php?img=6&parent=1

Image 2: Paris, December 1944: lack of coal shows here in no smoke coming from the chimneys.

Source: Edmond DuBois, Paris sans lumière 1939-1945 (Lausanne: Librarie Payot, 1946).

Image 3: Hamburg 1945

Source: http://www.utexas.edu/courses/swaffar/distance/draussen2.htm

Image 4: Berlin 1945: women clearing rubble (“Trümmerfrauen”)

Source : http://www.spiegel.de/fotostrecke/photo-gallery-women-in-the-rubble-fotostrecke-56829-3.html

Image 5 : Jean Monnet & Robert Schumann

Source: http://www.theeuros.eu/The-9th-may-s-declaration-which.html?lang=fr

Tables Table 1: European economies at the end of World War II

Real GDP, 1938=100

Source: based on Angus Maddison (GDP measured in 1990 international Geary-Khamis dollars).

Country 1945 1946 Belgium 89 95 France 55 83 Germany 88 42 Italy 61 79 Netherlands 55 92 UK 117 112 USA 206 163 Canada 170 168

Cartoons of the EU

Figure 1: EU enlargement

Cartoon on the question of EU enlargement to include Croatia. More precisely, ‘Welcome

Croatia!’ portrays Croatia’s difficult journey towards the EU.

Copyright: @Fritz Behrendt

Source: http://www.cvce.eu/obj/cartoon_by_behrendt_on_the_question_of_eu_enlargement_t

o_include_croatia-en-b89497bc-2b21-4c35-ae11-937b7343ee9a.html

Figure 2: Shengen area

Cartoon deals with an agreement (of the member states and the European Parliament, 2013)

on new rules facilitating the establishment of internal borders within the Schengen area. The

recent compromise on the new mode of functioning of the Schengen area may be a step

forward – or a step backwards, at the whim of the governments of the member states, who

may or may not act in good faith.

Copyright: @Presseurop/Schneider

Source: http://www.presseurop.eu/en/content/article/3865341-new-frontiers

Figure 3: Shengen area

In 2013 Germany has announced that it will veto the entry of Romania and Bulgaria into the

Schengen Area.

Copyright: @Presseurop/Pavel Constantin / Caglecartoons.com

Source: http://www.presseurop.eu/en/content/article/3505711-eu-must-stop-stepping-our-toes

Figure 4: Visas for free trade

“Listen, if you don't want to get rid of visas for Romanians, I'm going to introduce visas for

getting into Europe.”

Romanian Foreign Minister Titus Corlatean warned that his country would not be able

to ratify the free trade agreement signed between the European Union and Canada.

Bucharest has demanded that Ottawa to abolish visas for Romanian citizens who want

to travel to Canada, a condition that Canada lifted in mid-October for Czech nationals. A

Romanian refusal to ratify the deal, would block the implementation of the agreement,

which must be ratified by all 28 EU members.

Copyright: @Presseurop/Vali

Source: http://www.presseurop.eu/en/content/cartoon/4276191-visas-free-trade

Instructor resources

This section provides a variety of resources...

For instance, by using resources related especially to the Marshall Plan and the Letter from

Jean Monnet to Robert Schumann, students will learn about the arguments made in favour of

European economic cooperation and integration after the Second World War:

Students evaluate the arguments made for economic cooperation and

integration.

Students synthesize the information to create their own argument about

economic cooperation and integration.

Here are some questions for consideration related to the Marshall Plan and the Letter from

Jean Monnet to Robert Schumann:

Why did Marshall argue that European nations needed to cooperate in order to

succeed?

Why did Monnet argue that European nations should collaborate?

Why does Schumann argue for the “pooling of coal and steel production”?

Ventotene Manifesto 1941: http://www.altierospinelli.org/manifesto/en/manifesto1944en_en.html

Churchill’s Iron Curtain speech (Fulton, Missouri, 5 March 1946): Video (part of the speech): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8_wQ-5uxV4

Text: http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/churchill-iron.asp

Churchill’s United States of Europe speech (Zurich, 19 September 1946): Text: http://www.churchill-society-london.org.uk/astonish.html

Video (sound only): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8oUyFS556s

Marshall Plan: Text of George C. Marshall address (Harvard, 5 June 1947): http://www.oecd.org/general/themarshallplanspeechatharvarduniversity5june1947.htm

http://www.marshallfoundation.org/library/index_av.html

http://library.thinkquest.org/17692/Resources/speech/HarvardSpeech-Final.PDF

Letter from Jean Monnet to Robert Schumann:

http://www.cvce.eu/recherche/object-content/-/object/5cc6b004-33b7-4e44-

b6db-f5f9e6c01023/232ed0b4-3bfa-43ab-a44d-313de4e04e21/51fbe33e-e562-

4f5c-814c-496fbacf241d/en

European Coal and Steel Community: http://www.cvce.eu/obj/treaty_establishing_the_european_coal_and_steel_community_paris_

18_april_1951-en-11a21305-941e-49d7-a171-ed5be548cd58.html

Treaty of Rome: http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/emu_history/documents/treaties/rometreaty2.pdf

Single European Act: http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/emu_history/documents/treaties/singleuropeanact.pdf

Maastricht Treaty: http://www.eurotreaties.com/maastrichtext.html

http://www.eurotreaties.com/maastrichtec.pdf

Resources usage

This section provides some worksheets, a brief summary of the EU institutions and various

maps of the EU (enlargement map, Eurozone map and Shengen Area).

Worksheet 1 (Policy making in the EU)...

In the image 1 Institutions of the EU are introduced. Students will be able to answer

following questions:

Whose interests do institutions serve or represent?

Who are the members of each institution?

Where is each institution based?

What are its powers?

The image 2 provides a map of the EU enlargement (1958 ̶ 2013). Students will be able to

identify all 28 member states of the EU (by year of entry), candidates for membership and

potential candidates for membership.

In the image 3 Eurozone map is introduced. Students will be able to distinguish the EU

countries´s currency status (Euro area, currency pegged to Euro and floating currency). This

map could be also used in the section devoted to the EU symbols and a case study: Economic

Union.

The image 4 is focused on Shengen Area. Students will be able to identify EU Shengen

states, non-Shengen EU states, non-EU Shengen states and Shengen candidate countries. This

map could be also used in a case study: Integral Migration of the EU and in the section of the

EU cartoons devoted to Shengen Area.

Worksheets

Worksheet 1: Policy making in the EU

Who controls policy making in the European Union? In some areas, member states cooperate

but still retain ultimate control (intergovernmental areas). In others, they have chosen to give

up some sovereignty to make policy at the European level supranational levels.

In intergovernmental policy-making, the member states decide to cooperate but can’t be

forced to comply if they don’t agree. In supranational policy-making, a European level

executive (the Commission) proposes policies and the member states in the Council of

Ministers together with the European Parliament jointly serve as the legislative branch. If

member states don’t agree to policy, there is a chance they can be outvoted in the Council.

Intergovernmental Supranational

Examples of intergovernmental policy

areas

Examples of supranational policy areas

Images

Image 1: Institutions of the EU

Source: http://www.plan-eu.org/content//uploads/2011/11/EU-institutions-diagram_cropped.jpg

Image 2: Map of the EU enlargement

Source: http://www.learneurope.eu/files/8913/7508/4281/Enlargements_of_the_EU_1958_20

13_en.jpg

Image 3: Eurozone map

Source: http://cdn.static-economist.com/sites/default/files/20140104_currh.png?1388508850

Image 4: Shengen Area

Source: http://b.3cdn.net/better/b9f57655cb50d9d650_g0m6bxtdy.jpg

Introduction to the EU symbols

This section provides an overview of the EU symbols. It summaries and explains a meaning of

each symbol and includes several useful resources with some questions for consideration.

The EU is recognisable by several symbols, the most well-known being the circle of yellow stars

on a blue background.

The European flag

The flag symbolises the ideals of unity, solidarity and harmony among the peoples of Europe.

The history of the flag goes back to 1955, when the Council of Europe adopted the present

design for its own use and encouraged the emerging European institutions to adopt the flag as

well. That happened 30 years later.

Europe Day

The ideas behind the EU were first put forward on 9 May 1950 by French foreign minister

Robert Schuman. The date marks the anniversary of the historical 'Schuman declaration', where

Schuman set out his idea for a new form of political cooperation in Europe, which would make

war between Europe’s nations unthinkable. This is why 9 May is celebrated as a key date for the

EU.

The Euro

The euro is the single currency shared by currently 18 of the EU's Member States, which

together make up the euro area.

The European anthem

The melody used to symbolise the EU comes from the Ninth Symphony composed by Ludwig

Van Beethoven. The author of the poem "Ode to Joy" is Friedrich von Schiller.

The EU motto

"United in diversity" is the motto of the EU. It signifies how Europeans have come together, in

the form of the EU, to work for peace and prosperity, while at the same time being enriched by

the continent´s many different cultures, traditions and languages.

Could the EU motto be applied for Canada? If yes why?

EU symbols´ resources and activities for consideration

Images

Image 1: European flag8

Image 2: Euro coins and banknotes9

Image 3: Euro symbol10

8 Source: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:European_flag,_upside_down.svg

9 Source: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Euro_coins_and_banknotes.jpg

10 Source: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Euro_symbol_gold.svg

Do you know what 12 golden

stars in a circle on a blue

background symbolise?

What is the current Canadian

dollar's exchange rate against

the Euro?

Why do not all the EU's Member

States share the Euro currency?

Additional tasks for Euro

Students may also want to examine an article/some articles on the Euro zone crisis and discuss

whether or not economic cooperation and integration is still worth it.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/10/23/sunday-review/an-overview-of-the-euro-

crisis.html?_r=0

http://www.spiegel.de/international/topic/euro_crisis/

http://edition.cnn.com/SPECIALS/business/euro-crisis/index.html

http://www.cfr.org/thinktank/iigg/crisis/index.html

Links

Link 1: Schuman Declaration

Students may want to examine the Schuman Declaration and find out, why is the Franco-German

relationship crucial for any sort of European federation?

http://europa.eu/about-eu/basic-information/symbols/europe-day/schuman-

declaration/index_en.htm

Audios

Audio 1: European Anthem

Students may also want to listen the European Anthem:

http://europa.eu/about-eu/basic-information/symbols/anthem/european-anthem-2012.mp3

or

http://europa.eu/about-eu/basic-information/symbols/anthem/index_en.htm

Quotes

Three quotes are provided in this section to

Set of comprehensive questions:

In the quote 1 Monnet became explicit about his vision for a union of Europe to regain and retain

peace...

In the quote 2 Churchill formulated his conclusions drawn from the lessons of history. He was

convinced that only a united Europe could guarantee peace. His aim was to eliminate the

European ills of nationalism and war-mongering once and for all...

In the quote 3, some key quotes from the Schumann declaration point out that merging of

economic interests would help raise standards of living and be the first step towards a more

united Europe...

Quote 1:

Monnet Quote: During a meeting of the French Committee of National Liberation on 5 August

1943, Monnet declared:11

Quote 2:

Winston Churchill´s quote from the ‘Speech to the academic youth’ held at the University of

Zurich in 1946:12

11

Source: http://europa.eu/about-eu/eu-history/founding-fathers/pdf/jean_monnet_en.pdf 12

Source: http://europa.eu/about-eu/eu-history/founding-fathers/pdf/winston_churchill_en.pdf

“There will be no peace in Europe, if the states are reconstituted

on the basis of national sovereignty... The countries of Europe

are too small to guarantee their peoples the necessary prosperity

and social development. The European states must constitute

themselves into a federation...”

“There is a remedy which ... would in a few years make all Europe ... free

and ... happy. It is to re-create the European family, or as much of it as we

can, and to provide it with a structure under which it can dwell in peace,

in safety and in freedom. We must build a kind of United States of

Europe.”

Quote 3:

Key quotes from the Schumann declaration:13

13

Source: http://europa.eu/about-eu/basic-information/symbols/europe-day/schuman-declaration/index_en.htm

"World peace cannot be safeguarded without the making of creative

efforts proportionate to the dangers which threaten it."

"Europe will not be made all at once, or according to a single plan.

It will be built through concrete achievements which first create a

de facto solidarity."

"The pooling of coal and steel production... will change the

destinies of those regions which have long been devoted to the

manufacture of munitions of war, of which they have been the most

constant victims."