Constructing Europe: Period 4
Preparation Week - Podcast 1:
What is an Ever-Closing Union? What does this mean?
- The European-Union is an Ever-Closing Union.
A concept that says something that is in progress, something that is moving, and something
that is moving forwards → its a narrative of progress towards a goal → this idea of the EU as
a moving object.
The phrase "ever closer union" is a foundational objective of European integration, enshrined
in the treaties that established the European Communities and later the European Union. It
signifies a long-term vision in which European nations gradually increase their levels of
political, economic, and social cooperation, ultimately working toward a more unified
and integrated Europe. This concept implies that integration is a continuous
process—each step, whether in establishing common policies, shared institutions, or
economic measures like the single market and monetary union, is part of an ongoing journey
toward greater unity. The idea is both aspirational and dynamic, reflecting the belief that over
time, deeper collaboration will lead to reduced national conflicts, enhanced solidarity, and a
more coherent collective decision-making process at the European level.
How is this idea expressed in (the study of) the history of the European Union?
Ruling Europe taught us that history is not linear, an ever-closing union like the EU cannot be
linear either. Integration requires us to sometimes move backwards (such as with Brexit), and
then forwards.
Imagining Europe taught us that there is a grain of truth. The constructions that we created
might not be there for a certain purpose even though they are not coincidental, they are done
to create some kind of coherence.
So an ever-closing union like the EU is a historically non-linear construction that is created to
prevent disruptions when achieving a goal while moving forward.
How do we deal with this “European unity,” how do we achieve it?
1. Idea of Federalism: the federal principle or system of government. Either it came from
the people, or it had to be initiated by states.
2. Idea of Functionalism: the collective governance and material interdependence
between states
3. Put into a treaty: European Economic Treaty (EEC) + European Atomic Energy
Community (EurAtom) 1957 → first treaties established the European Coal and Steel
Community
,Question 1: Which events/ developments strike you as the most significant ones for each
decade in this period? Give concrete examples.
1950s:
● European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) (1952) → the first supranational
institution formed under the vision of figures like Jean Monnet and Robert
Schuman. It aimed to pool the coal and steel industries of France and Germany,
making war between them “materially impossible.” Foundational step → beginning of
European integration by transcending national sovereignty in a critical economic
sector.
● Treaties of Rome (1957): These treaties established two new organizations: the
European Economic Community (EEC) and the European Atomic Energy
Community (EURATOM). The EEC's aim was to create a common market and a
customs union, facilitating the free movement of goods, services, capital, and
workers. This was a critical development, solidifying the economic integration of the
Six (Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands), creating a
foundation for future political integration.
● Western European Union (WEU) and NATO: The WEU, created in 1954, allowed
West Germany to rearm and join NATO, showing the interconnectedness of military
security and European integration. This reflects the EU’s role not just in economic
cooperation, but in addressing military and geopolitical concerns post-World War II.
1960s:
● Empty Chair Crisis (1965): This was a major crisis of European integration.
Charles de Gaulle, the French President, opposed the shift to qualified majority
voting in the European Economic Community (EEC), fearing a loss of French
influence. His withdrawal of French participation in EEC meetings (symbolized by
the "empty chair") demonstrated the tension between supranationalism and
intergovernmentalism. The resolution, the Luxembourg Compromise, ensured that
significant national issues would still require unanimous approval, signaling the limits
of European integration at that time.
● Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and Customs Union Completion: These two
developments marked significant steps in deeper economic integration. The CAP,
which aimed to standardize agricultural subsidies and production policies across the
EEC, was a key area where European nations shared economic sovereignty. The
completion of the customs union in 1968, which eliminated internal tariffs among
EEC countries, further solidified the economic base of the Union.
● Failed European Defense Community (EDC): The failure of the EDC, a plan to
create a European army, highlighted the limits of political integration. France’s
rejection of this plan, along with broader reluctance to integrate military forces,
marked a crucial setback in efforts to establish a political union alongside economic
integration.
1970s:
, ● Eurosclerosis: This term referred to the period of stagnation in European integration
during the 1970s, marked by economic crises, oil price shocks, and high
unemployment. The EEC’s expansion faced significant challenges as economic
instability shifted national priorities back to domestic concerns rather than collective
European goals. Integration efforts faltered, and "Eurosclerosis" became a popular
term to describe the lack of progress in the EEC.
● UK’s Membership and Referendum (1973-1975): The UK joined the EEC in 1973,
but the decision faced significant domestic opposition. In 1975, the UK held a
referendum to decide whether it should remain in the Common Market, showing the
deep divide between those who saw European integration as beneficial and those who
feared loss of sovereignty. The referendum's outcome was a yes to staying in, but the
deep unease about integration persisted throughout the decade.
● European Monetary System (EMS) (1979): The EMS was a critical step toward
economic convergence in Europe. It sought to stabilize exchange rates and prevent the
devaluation of currencies within the EEC, setting the groundwork for future monetary
union, which would later lead to the creation of the Euro.
1980s:
● Single European Act (1986): The Single European Act was a key turning point in
the evolution of the EU. It set a target for completing the single market by 1992,
eliminating barriers to the free movement of goods, services, people, and capital. This
was one of the most significant steps toward deeper integration, reflecting a
neo-functionalist vision where economic cooperation in one sector leads to demands
for integration in others.
● First Direct Elections to the European Parliament (1979): While not immediately
impactful in terms of legislative power, the first direct elections marked an important
step in making the EU more democratic and representative. This further emphasized
the EU's gradual shift from purely economic cooperation to political integration.
● Formation of the European Monetary System (EMS) (1979): The EMS began in
1979, setting the stage for monetary union and later the adoption of a single
currency. This was a significant commitment to deeper economic integration, though
challenges remained due to differing economic conditions among member states.
Question 2: Have opt-outs (chooses not to participate in certain policies or agreements that
other member states are bound by) and mechanisms of enhanced cooperation undermined the
EU as a union?
Opt-outs and enhanced cooperation mechanisms have complicated the EU’s ambition for full
integration but have not necessarily undermined its unity. These mechanisms reflect the
divergent preferences of member states and allow for more flexibility within the EU
structure, but they also highlight tensions between national sovereignty and the EU’s
collective goals. Some key examples:
, ● UK's Opt-Outs: The UK repeatedly sought opt-outs from various EU policies,
including the Euro and Schengen Area, reflecting its reluctance to fully embrace
European integration. This created divisions within the EU, as it allowed the UK to
retain certain national controls while still benefiting from the economic advantages of
membership. This duality was part of what led to Brexit—the UK's departure from
the EU—which was driven by growing concerns over loss of sovereignty.
● Denmark’s Opt-Outs: Denmark secured opt-outs on the Euro and certain defense
and justice policies, allowing it to retain control over certain national issues while
participating in EU decision-making in other areas. This arrangement has somewhat
weakened the EU’s push toward complete political union, but it has enabled Denmark
to maintain a balance between sovereignty and cooperation.
● Enhanced Cooperation Mechanisms: Mechanisms like enhanced cooperation
allow smaller groups of countries to move ahead in certain policy areas without
requiring unanimous agreement from all EU members. While these arrangements can
push integration in areas like defense or taxation, they also underline the divisions
between EU member states, making the Union appear more fragmented and less
cohesive.
➔ The introduction of opt-outs and mechanisms for enhanced cooperation has generated
debate over the uniformity and cohesion of the EU, but whether they have
undermined the union depends on one’s perspective. On one hand, opt-outs—such as
those secured by the United Kingdom, Denmark, and Ireland—allow certain member
states to avoid committing to policies (like the euro or aspects of justice and home
affairs) that they believe would compromise national sovereignty. Similarly, enhanced
cooperation enables a subgroup of willing countries to advance in specific policy
areas without needing unanimous consent from all members. These arrangements
create a "multi-speed" union, where not all members are fully integrated in every
policy area. Critics argue that this differentiation weakens the notion of a fully unified
Europe and could lead to fragmentation. On the other hand, these mechanisms have
provided necessary flexibility that allows the EU to accommodate diverse national
preferences and political realities, thereby preserving overall unity by preventing
deadlock. In practice, they have not destroyed the EU but have instead become an
integral part of its complex structure, balancing the desire for deeper integration with
respect for national sovereignty.
While these mechanisms can create a multi-speed EU, where countries move forward at
different paces, they have not destroyed the EU’s underlying unity. Instead, they highlight the
EU's adaptability in responding to the diverse needs and preferences of its members. The
Union has become more complex and less homogeneous, but it has also been able to
accommodate different levels of cooperation, which arguably strengthens its overall
cohesiveness.
Preparation Week - Podcast 1:
What is an Ever-Closing Union? What does this mean?
- The European-Union is an Ever-Closing Union.
A concept that says something that is in progress, something that is moving, and something
that is moving forwards → its a narrative of progress towards a goal → this idea of the EU as
a moving object.
The phrase "ever closer union" is a foundational objective of European integration, enshrined
in the treaties that established the European Communities and later the European Union. It
signifies a long-term vision in which European nations gradually increase their levels of
political, economic, and social cooperation, ultimately working toward a more unified
and integrated Europe. This concept implies that integration is a continuous
process—each step, whether in establishing common policies, shared institutions, or
economic measures like the single market and monetary union, is part of an ongoing journey
toward greater unity. The idea is both aspirational and dynamic, reflecting the belief that over
time, deeper collaboration will lead to reduced national conflicts, enhanced solidarity, and a
more coherent collective decision-making process at the European level.
How is this idea expressed in (the study of) the history of the European Union?
Ruling Europe taught us that history is not linear, an ever-closing union like the EU cannot be
linear either. Integration requires us to sometimes move backwards (such as with Brexit), and
then forwards.
Imagining Europe taught us that there is a grain of truth. The constructions that we created
might not be there for a certain purpose even though they are not coincidental, they are done
to create some kind of coherence.
So an ever-closing union like the EU is a historically non-linear construction that is created to
prevent disruptions when achieving a goal while moving forward.
How do we deal with this “European unity,” how do we achieve it?
1. Idea of Federalism: the federal principle or system of government. Either it came from
the people, or it had to be initiated by states.
2. Idea of Functionalism: the collective governance and material interdependence
between states
3. Put into a treaty: European Economic Treaty (EEC) + European Atomic Energy
Community (EurAtom) 1957 → first treaties established the European Coal and Steel
Community
,Question 1: Which events/ developments strike you as the most significant ones for each
decade in this period? Give concrete examples.
1950s:
● European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) (1952) → the first supranational
institution formed under the vision of figures like Jean Monnet and Robert
Schuman. It aimed to pool the coal and steel industries of France and Germany,
making war between them “materially impossible.” Foundational step → beginning of
European integration by transcending national sovereignty in a critical economic
sector.
● Treaties of Rome (1957): These treaties established two new organizations: the
European Economic Community (EEC) and the European Atomic Energy
Community (EURATOM). The EEC's aim was to create a common market and a
customs union, facilitating the free movement of goods, services, capital, and
workers. This was a critical development, solidifying the economic integration of the
Six (Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands), creating a
foundation for future political integration.
● Western European Union (WEU) and NATO: The WEU, created in 1954, allowed
West Germany to rearm and join NATO, showing the interconnectedness of military
security and European integration. This reflects the EU’s role not just in economic
cooperation, but in addressing military and geopolitical concerns post-World War II.
1960s:
● Empty Chair Crisis (1965): This was a major crisis of European integration.
Charles de Gaulle, the French President, opposed the shift to qualified majority
voting in the European Economic Community (EEC), fearing a loss of French
influence. His withdrawal of French participation in EEC meetings (symbolized by
the "empty chair") demonstrated the tension between supranationalism and
intergovernmentalism. The resolution, the Luxembourg Compromise, ensured that
significant national issues would still require unanimous approval, signaling the limits
of European integration at that time.
● Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and Customs Union Completion: These two
developments marked significant steps in deeper economic integration. The CAP,
which aimed to standardize agricultural subsidies and production policies across the
EEC, was a key area where European nations shared economic sovereignty. The
completion of the customs union in 1968, which eliminated internal tariffs among
EEC countries, further solidified the economic base of the Union.
● Failed European Defense Community (EDC): The failure of the EDC, a plan to
create a European army, highlighted the limits of political integration. France’s
rejection of this plan, along with broader reluctance to integrate military forces,
marked a crucial setback in efforts to establish a political union alongside economic
integration.
1970s:
, ● Eurosclerosis: This term referred to the period of stagnation in European integration
during the 1970s, marked by economic crises, oil price shocks, and high
unemployment. The EEC’s expansion faced significant challenges as economic
instability shifted national priorities back to domestic concerns rather than collective
European goals. Integration efforts faltered, and "Eurosclerosis" became a popular
term to describe the lack of progress in the EEC.
● UK’s Membership and Referendum (1973-1975): The UK joined the EEC in 1973,
but the decision faced significant domestic opposition. In 1975, the UK held a
referendum to decide whether it should remain in the Common Market, showing the
deep divide between those who saw European integration as beneficial and those who
feared loss of sovereignty. The referendum's outcome was a yes to staying in, but the
deep unease about integration persisted throughout the decade.
● European Monetary System (EMS) (1979): The EMS was a critical step toward
economic convergence in Europe. It sought to stabilize exchange rates and prevent the
devaluation of currencies within the EEC, setting the groundwork for future monetary
union, which would later lead to the creation of the Euro.
1980s:
● Single European Act (1986): The Single European Act was a key turning point in
the evolution of the EU. It set a target for completing the single market by 1992,
eliminating barriers to the free movement of goods, services, people, and capital. This
was one of the most significant steps toward deeper integration, reflecting a
neo-functionalist vision where economic cooperation in one sector leads to demands
for integration in others.
● First Direct Elections to the European Parliament (1979): While not immediately
impactful in terms of legislative power, the first direct elections marked an important
step in making the EU more democratic and representative. This further emphasized
the EU's gradual shift from purely economic cooperation to political integration.
● Formation of the European Monetary System (EMS) (1979): The EMS began in
1979, setting the stage for monetary union and later the adoption of a single
currency. This was a significant commitment to deeper economic integration, though
challenges remained due to differing economic conditions among member states.
Question 2: Have opt-outs (chooses not to participate in certain policies or agreements that
other member states are bound by) and mechanisms of enhanced cooperation undermined the
EU as a union?
Opt-outs and enhanced cooperation mechanisms have complicated the EU’s ambition for full
integration but have not necessarily undermined its unity. These mechanisms reflect the
divergent preferences of member states and allow for more flexibility within the EU
structure, but they also highlight tensions between national sovereignty and the EU’s
collective goals. Some key examples:
, ● UK's Opt-Outs: The UK repeatedly sought opt-outs from various EU policies,
including the Euro and Schengen Area, reflecting its reluctance to fully embrace
European integration. This created divisions within the EU, as it allowed the UK to
retain certain national controls while still benefiting from the economic advantages of
membership. This duality was part of what led to Brexit—the UK's departure from
the EU—which was driven by growing concerns over loss of sovereignty.
● Denmark’s Opt-Outs: Denmark secured opt-outs on the Euro and certain defense
and justice policies, allowing it to retain control over certain national issues while
participating in EU decision-making in other areas. This arrangement has somewhat
weakened the EU’s push toward complete political union, but it has enabled Denmark
to maintain a balance between sovereignty and cooperation.
● Enhanced Cooperation Mechanisms: Mechanisms like enhanced cooperation
allow smaller groups of countries to move ahead in certain policy areas without
requiring unanimous agreement from all EU members. While these arrangements can
push integration in areas like defense or taxation, they also underline the divisions
between EU member states, making the Union appear more fragmented and less
cohesive.
➔ The introduction of opt-outs and mechanisms for enhanced cooperation has generated
debate over the uniformity and cohesion of the EU, but whether they have
undermined the union depends on one’s perspective. On one hand, opt-outs—such as
those secured by the United Kingdom, Denmark, and Ireland—allow certain member
states to avoid committing to policies (like the euro or aspects of justice and home
affairs) that they believe would compromise national sovereignty. Similarly, enhanced
cooperation enables a subgroup of willing countries to advance in specific policy
areas without needing unanimous consent from all members. These arrangements
create a "multi-speed" union, where not all members are fully integrated in every
policy area. Critics argue that this differentiation weakens the notion of a fully unified
Europe and could lead to fragmentation. On the other hand, these mechanisms have
provided necessary flexibility that allows the EU to accommodate diverse national
preferences and political realities, thereby preserving overall unity by preventing
deadlock. In practice, they have not destroyed the EU but have instead become an
integral part of its complex structure, balancing the desire for deeper integration with
respect for national sovereignty.
While these mechanisms can create a multi-speed EU, where countries move forward at
different paces, they have not destroyed the EU’s underlying unity. Instead, they highlight the
EU's adaptability in responding to the diverse needs and preferences of its members. The
Union has become more complex and less homogeneous, but it has also been able to
accommodate different levels of cooperation, which arguably strengthens its overall
cohesiveness.
