The History and Milestones of European Integration

Dr. Spyros Blavoukos (sblavo@aueb.gr) Assistant ProfessorDepartment of International and European Economic StudiesAthens University of Economics and Business

Structure of the Presentation• Part I: Historical Development• Origins – Economic and Political Rationale of the European

Integration Process• From the European Defense Community (EDC – 1950) to the

Treaty of Rome (1957) • Part II: Key Milestones – Deepening and Widening of the

European Integration Process• Treaties• Policy Processes• Policy Programs

• Part III: EU Institutions• Part IV: Cooperation in Foreign and Security Policy – EU in

the Globe

PART I: Historical Development

Historical Background: Political Factors behind European integration

• Combating nationalism and the ‘German problem’

• New political map of Europe (East-West)

• New international power balance

Historical Background: Economic Factors behind European integration

• Bretton Woods institutions (1944)

• Economic Restructuring of Europe post WWII:• Marshall Plan (1947)• Aid conditionality: economic cooperation and

openness

• Interdependence (economic & political)

European Coal & Steel Community (ECSC) (1951)• Why coal and steel? Basic

components of military industrial production

• Schuman Declaration (9 May 1950) →ECSC - Treaty of Paris (1951)

• Institutions: High Authority/ Commission; Council of Ministers; Common Assembly; Court of Justice

• Initial success but coal & steel declining importance/ other energy sources

An Alternative Path: the European Defense Community (EDC)• In light of Soviet threat and despite the establishment of

NATO (1949), quest for greater defense cooperation• Also, to reintegrate German forces in West-European defense

• Pleven plan: European Defense Community agreed by the 6 (1952) • Joint military forces and command (less than a decade

after the end of WWII!)

• EDC rejected by French National Assembly (1954) EDC collapse (one year later, West Germany joins NATO)

• An alternative path straight to the core of national sovereignty

…to the EEC Rome Treaty (1957)

• Back to the original Schuman strategy: political union best achieved via economic integration

• Messina (1955): further econ. integration (“united Europe”)

• Two Treaties of Rome 1957: • European Economic

Community (EEC)• Euratom (European Atomic

Energy Community)

• EEC: clear rules on trade, guiding principles for social and agricultural policy

The EEC Treaty

• Removal of tariffs & quotas free trade area• Common External Tariff for external imports;

basis for Common Commercial Policy customs union (completed in 1968)• Prohibition of distortion of competition• Measures to promote free movement of

persons, services and capital (SM)• Institutions: Commission; Council of Ministers;

Assembly; Court of Justice

Part II: Key Milestones – Deepening and Widening of the European Integration Process

Deepening of Integration: Treaty Development

• Treaty Development• Rome (1957/ 1958)• Single European Act (1986/

1987)• Maastricht Treaty (1991/

1993)• Amsterdam Treaty (1997/

1999)• Nice Treaty (2001/ 2003)• Constitutional Treaty

(2004/ never ratified)• Lisbon Treaty(2007/ 2009)

Is there a pattern? Why?

Deepening of Integration: Policy-Making Processes

• Dynamic inter-institutional relationships• New ‘actors in town’

(Heads of Government, national & transnational sectoral interests)• Policy process more varied

& complex• More emphasis on

efficiency (use of QMV -away from unanimity) & democracy (EP ↑↑↑)

Deepening of Integration: Policies (1/2)• Core: Economic and Related Policies • Internal Market/ Single European Market (‘project 1992’)• EU as a ‘regulatory state’• Emphasis on product standards; liberalization of national

economies; prudential regulation; control against subsidies, etc,• Additional to core: Employment, environment, consumer

protection; working conditions• Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) (today 19

members)• BUT: limited involvement in social welfare, education,

health • Redistribution through: Common Agricultural Policy

(CAP) and Regional policies (ERDF, Structural and Cohesion Funds)

Deepening of Integration: Policies (2/2)• Other policy areas:• foreign & security • defense; • justice & home affairs• In general, very few areas left without significant EU

policies

Widening of the Integration Process: Enlargement

• 1st enlargement (1973): DEN, IRE, UK

• Mediterranean (1981/86): GR, ESP, POR

• EFTAn (1995): AU, FIN, SWE• 10+2 (2004): CY, CZ, EST, HU,

LAT, LIT, MAL, POL, SLOVK, SLOVN + BU, RO (2007)

• CR (2013)• Total: EU-28• 6 candidate countries: ALB,

ICL, MTNEGRO, SERB, FYROM, TUR

• No enlargement for the next five years

• http://europa.eu/about-eu/countries/index_en.htm

1ST Enlargement (1973)

• FRA against UK (1961 and 1967 –French vetoes) (de Gaulle in power): could unsettle FR-GR alliance; ties with US; dilute integration

• U-shift: FRA for UK (1969)(Pompidou in power): counterweight to GER; support FRA to opposition to supranationalism; economic gains, UK net contributor

• Reasons for British urge to join: UK in decline, Commonwealth and special relation with US under crisis, EC outperforming UK, rising EC political status

Mediterranean enlargement (1981/86)

• Concerns about the underdevelopment of the Greek economy• Commission negative Opinion

• Still, GR (applied 1974 – accession 1981): underpin democracy; consolidate GR’s west european alliance bonds

• SP-POR (applied 1977 – accession 1986)

• Decoupling of accession negotiations

EFTAn Enlargement (1995)

• EFTA: European Free Trade Association in demise• EFTA unsatisfactory (had to accept rules they

could not influence)• EFTA was replaced by EEA in 1994

• End of cold war (neutrality status not an impediment )

• Norway voted against

‘Bing Bang’: Central and Eastern Europe10+2 (2004/7)

• Why? EU seen as provider of soft security protection and for economic benefits

• EU enlargement criteria (1993, Copenhagen): • democracy, rule of law, human rights,

respect for minorities• functioning market economy,

capacity to cope with market competition in EU;

• candidate ability to adhere to aims of political, econ. & monetary union

• “EU capacity to absorb new members, while maintaining momentum of integration”

Impact of Enlargement on EU• Leads to Treaty reforms,

increases in QMV since SEA (1986)• EU institutions grew in size • Institutional and administrative

problems (e.g. language)• EU policy outcomes more flexible

(OMC; differentiation/ enhanced cooperation; opt outs)• Uploading of additional M/S

requirements, preferences, problems • EU global importance

Part III: EU Institutions

Institutional Structure: An Overview• Supranational• Commission• European Parliament• European Court of

Justice• European Central

Bank

• Intergovernmental• Council of Ministers• European Council

The Political System of the EU (1/3)

Division of Power

• Executive Branch: COMMISSION

• Legislative Branch: COUNCIL OF MINISTERS and the EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT (co-decision or ‘ordinary’ procedure)

• Judicial Branch: EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE

Political/Strategic Guidance

• EUROPEAN COUNCIL (Heads of State and Government)

The Political System of the EU: Decision-Making (2/3)

Decision-Making in the EU

• About the EP involvement:• Consultation procedure• Assent procedure• Co-decision

Decision-Making in the Council

• Simple majority• Special majority• 55% of M/S• 65% of EU population

• Unanimity

The Political System of the EU: How Democratic Is It? (3/3)

• An elite-driven process• The ‘Golden Years’

(1960s-70s): ‘Permissive consensus’• “Democratic deficit”:

bring people in• How?• EP empowerment• More use of majoritarian

decision-making• National Parliaments

engaged

COMMISSION: Main Features (1/3)• The ‘executive’ branch of government • ‘The Commission proposes, the Council and the

EP disposes’• Main expression of supranational forces in the

European integration process • ‘College of Commissioners’ (team spirit /

collegial, not individualistic)• Collective responsibility (consensus pursued;

voting takes place but no records are available)

COMMISSION: Structure (2/3)• One Commissioner per M/S including the President

and the High Representative.• Five year term which may be renewed. • Each Commissioner nominated by his/her member

state, but must be acceptable to the President.• The College as a whole must be approved by the EP

after individual “hearings”.• Each Commissioner has a portfolio.• Commissioners are not national representatives but

should promote “the general interest of the Union” (Art. 17, TEU)• President: from Lisbon Treaty onwards, direct link

with EP elections

COMMISSION: Functions (3/3)

Proposer and developer of policies and legislation

Executive functionsGuardian of the legal frameworkExternal representative and negotiatorMediator and conciliator

COUNCIL OF MINISTERS: Main Features (1/3) • Main intergovernmental

body; the ‘legislative branch’• Legally, only one Council

of Ministers; in practice, different formations or configurations

Council used to meet in over 20 formations; nowadays:

General Affairs; Foreign Affairs; Economic and Financial Affairs (ECOFIN); Justice and Home Affairs; Employment, Social Policy, Health and Consumer Affairs; Competitiveness; Transport, Telecommunications, Energy; Agriculture and Fisheries; Environment; Education, Youth and Culture

COUNCIL OF MINISTERS: Structure (2/3)• Normally, four or five people support the “inner table

team”; in very confidential issues, size may be reduced to “Ministers plus two”, “Ministers plus one”, or, exceptionally, “Ministers and Commission”

• Role of the Committee of Permanent Representatives (COREPER).

• COREPER I (technical policy and legislative matters, M/S delegations headed by the Deputy Permanent Representative)

• COREPER II (more senior and more political, m-s delegations headed by the Permanent Representatives).

COUNCIL OF MINISTERS: Functions (3/3)• Policy and law maker: • Shared responsibilities mainly with COM and EP• Two-fold limitations: Council of Ministers acts on the basis of

proposals made by the COM ; EP has very important legislative powers

• Executive: • through committees composed of national government

officials (‘commitology’). • Most obvious and direct Council executive activity in foreign

and defense policy areas

• Mediator: • national and ideological interests in the Council, • between the Council and the COM and the Council and the EP

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT: Main Features (1/3)• Present from the beginning (Assembly of the ECSC) but

had only an advisory role;

• Gradual rise to co-legislator role (power to block legislative proposals under the co-decision process)

• Indirect role: • EU budget• European Council’s proposal of a candidate for COM President

must be made taking into account the elections to the EP.• The Commissioners-designate shall be subject as a body to an

EP vote of consent• The EP can dismiss the College – but not individual

Commissioners – by carrying a motion of censure by a 2/3 majority of the votes.

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT: Structure and Functioning(2/3)

Structure• Very loosely

organized transnational federations grouped around general principles (EPP, PES, ELDR) → political groups in the EP

Functioning• Multi-site problem:

Brussels, Strasbourg, Luxembourg (‘moving circus’ critique)• EP Committees• Important role of

‘rapporteur’

EP ELECTIONS

• 1979 the first direct elections. • different electoral

systems, constituency structure, eligibility for election and in the number of citizens MEPs represent.• Low voter turnout

EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE (ECJ)• The Court of Justice of the European Union consists of

three courts:• the Court of Justice, • the General Court (formerly called the Court of First

Instance)• the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (just deals

with internal EU staffing disputes).• All courts located in Luxembourg• Often confusion with the Strasbourg-based European

Court of Human Rights (Council of Europe) or the The Hague-based International Court of Justice (UN)• One judge per M/S

ECJ: Impact and influence• Clarification and

strengthening of EU law

• Extension of EU policy competence (internal market).

• Clarification of powers and functioning of the institutions.

• Judgments have saved the EU the need to make law in existing areas of competence.

•

• HOWEVER:• Constraints by the

existing policy framework • ECJ cannot initiate cases

PART IV: Cooperation in Foreign and Security Policy – EU in the Globe

In Quest for the ‘Single Phone Number’• Pleven Plan (1950):

European Defense Community (EDC) – single European army under a single political authority [failure]

• Fouchet Plan (1961-2): intergovernmental cooperation in parallel to economic integration (the French view)

• European Political Cooperation (1973):• outside Treaty framework• Deliberation, no

committing decisions• Emphasis on ‘civilian

power Europe

Common Foreign and Security Policy – Maastricht Treaty (1991)• Background (1989-90): • end of Cold War; integration of re-unified Germany in

Europe; • Foreign and Security Policy as a corollary of political

integration• parallel negotiations on EMU

• Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP):• one of the three pillars of the TEU• intergovernmental nature: unanimity, no involvement of

ECJ and EP • full respect to the political autonomy of FR and UK in the

UNSC

• Dissolution of ex-Yugoslavia: collapse and paralysis

Amsterdam Treaty (1997)

• ‘Constructive Abstention’ • New post: High Representative (Javier Solana)• Integration of ‘Petersberg tasks’ (UN-like peace

keeping operations)• Why? Absorption of Western European Union

(WEU) and accession of the ‘neutrals’ (AUS, FNL, SWE)

‘Headline Objective’ (1999/2004)

• Cologne and Helsinki Eur. Councils (1999): ‘Headline Objective’ - European Rapid Reaction Force • By 2003, By 2003, 5050,,000 000 to to 6060,,000 000 personnel, to be deployed within personnel, to be deployed within

60 days, sustained for up to one year60 days, sustained for up to one year• St Mallot Summit (1998): Franco-British understandingSt Mallot Summit (1998): Franco-British understanding• Complemented with civilian Headline Goal (police officers, Complemented with civilian Headline Goal (police officers,

judges, administrators) (Feira, 2000)judges, administrators) (Feira, 2000)

• Revised (2004) – ‘Headline Goal 2010’: introduces ‘Battle Group concept’ • high readiness forces - 1,500 personnel, to be deployed

within 10 days, sustained for up to 30 days (extendible to 120 days with rotation).

EUROPEAN SECURITY STRATEGY (ESS)(2003/8)• Basic security threats and EU international engagement

• EU as a global player: • should be ready to share in the responsibility for global security

and in building a better world• should develop a shared vision of global challenges and threats• should be more active, more capable, and more coherent

• Threats: international terrorism, weapons of mass destruction, regional crises, failed states, organized crime

• Mantra of ‘effective multilateralism’ : emphasis on international law, effective international organizations, principles and norms

• Collaboration with International Organizations

Lisbon Treaty (2007)• Cooperation still

intergovernmental• High Representative:

merging of two posts• Commissioner responsible

for external affairs and High Representative of CFSP

• To bring coherence and increase effectiveness

• European External Action Service (EEAS)• Revised list of “Petersberg

tasks”

• Solidarity clause : support in case of terrorist attacks or humanitarian disasters• Protocol on “Permanent

Structured Cooperation”: enables closer cooperation in military and defense issues

Main Actors Involved

• Council of Ministers, chaired by HR/VP

• Political and Security Committee (PSC): Ambassadors• Political friction with COREPER

• EU Military Committee (EUMC): CHODS and Military Representatives – advisory role

• Civilian Committee (CivCom): advisory role

How It Works

A Successful Foreign and Security Policy for the EU? • Trend to underestimate EU

international influence• Shift away from traditional

security conceptualization• Holistic approach required!

• Nobel Prize (2012) for what the EU is, not for what it does

• ‘A New Kid on the Block’: learning (?) by (impressive) failure

Quo Vadis?• Differentiated integration → ‘islands of cooperation’ to

overcome opposition• The inevitable end of the Schuman vision?• M/S hold the key!

THANK YOU!

Basic Bibliography

• Nugent, N. (2010) The Government and Politics of the European Union, 7th ed. (London: Palgrave Macmillan)• Jørgensen, K-E., Pollack M.A., and B. Rosamond

(eds) (2006) The Handbook of European Union Politics (London: Sage)• Jones, E., A. Menon, and S. Weatherill (eds)

(2012) The Oxford Handbook of the European Union (Oxford: Oxford University Press).