"The national influence on the European integration"

Résumé du document

EU is regulated by a supranational institutional system, which still takes into account the national sensitiveness. Nevertheless, there is not a traditional strong supranational authority. Indeed, there is neither army nor police, and the decision making process is mainly based on consensus; and sometimes in case of major decision, the unanimity is then used. The national weight is a guarantee for stability. The national law has a priority on the communitarian one, and the EU can intervene only in case of higher efficiency, according to subsidiary's part. Historically speaking, European Union exists so as to improve many fields. It insures a political stability, based on dialogue, peace, and democracy. The EU has made a liberal area, to increase the various exchanges and the mobility of fund, person, goods and services. The European integration is both a question of enlargement and of deeper relationship. The European integration keeps on going, because of the common interest to increase its efficiency. The liberal trend is likely both to increase the economic growth and to decrease the social policy. It then gives a strong legitimacy to the European politic, the goal of which is to regulate the market, satisfying the most possible the population. Moreover, the enlargement events translate a spreading of the European integration will. Because the EU construction is a national question, because its evolution indirectly depends on the national governments, because the national interest is often more important than the European one, because the public support to European construction is depending on the national governments, it clearly appears that the national weight is capital. This is the reason why I think it is all the more important to grasp the state part, played in the EU integration, above all concerning the key States, such as France, Germany, and the new comers. Moreover, the European integration is a question of deepening integration and enlargement. The potential new MS should give a new balance among the EU.

Extraits

[...] Nevertheless, and more generally, the crisis is too often presented as a danger, but the current troubles lead to further discussions and reflexions, which can be a great potential for a re birth of the EU integration. The European integration is easier in case of enlargement, than in case of deepening common basis. c. The eastern enlargement: an accelerator or a break for EU? The eastern enlargement was a logical process. The Eastern Europe was separated from the Western Europe because of political tragedy. [...]

[...] The increasing EU power on the foreign policies can be improved. Common values are, of course, reinforced: democracy, freedom, peace, are great victory. The German public opinion is balanced, some do not like the highest liberal aspects and the low social guarantees that the EU integration brings. However, the second country benefiting of the Structural Fund is Germany. Germany exists on the European scene by its collaboration with its closest partnership: France. b. the French policy To seize how the EU integration is evolving, it is interesting to point out the French situation, so as to get a rather precise image of the current situation. [...]

[...] Turkey has still political progress to do. There is an important paradox; democracy is guaranteed by a strong and influencing military, but their close influencing relationships with the government do not fit with the ideal of democracy. Moreover, the Cypriot occupation and the refusal to officialize the Armenian genocide are the biggest political issues. The integration of Turkey is compromised by the unanimity vote necessary for each new integration: Cyprus could put its veto, even if the other member states can put pressure to avoid such a situation. [...]

[...] Then, the three dimensional possibility to integrate EU make the integration complex. The actual border can evolve, however, the final limits are still blur. For instance, the integration of far eastern Europe is currently impossible, because of the Russian control on the political field to defend the Russian economic interests. Ukraine or Belarus have a high degree of corruption, an economic lack, and democratic carences. The result and the European enlargement is a step by step phenomenon, which cannot be already limited. [...]

[...] The intergovernmental and the liberal approach are defended, and if the future of EU would involves more and more EU, but the national aspects will be still respected. EU is more inspired by federalism model. The failure of the constitution's ratification represents a fear of the blur and scaring future. The next constitution should be more concrete, more pragmatic, and above all more and more explained. It should work just as a practical body, which does not search to give a political aspect. One must bear in mind, that interest is everything but the same thing as attraction. [...]