|
When Federal Union was launched in London in 1938 it
had extraordinary success, with membership rising rapidly to ten thousand
and support from leading politicians, academics and newspapers. The background
to this was, for many British people, the perception of an existential
challenge to the nation-state from the ruinous impact of the international
economy in the 1930s and the rise of aggressive fascism leading to war.
But the second world war was won and the British emerged confident that
their nation-state had served its purpose and future challenges could,
like that of the war, be overcome under American leadership. So Britain
dragged its feet at the start of European unification and has, with some
exceptions, done so ever since.
On the European Continent, to the contrary, federalist
movements before the war were generally weak, whereas the war brought
home the existential challenge to the nation-state and its citizens in
the clearest possible way; and this led to the growth of strong federalist
movements together with widespread acceptance of the idea of a federal
Europe to ensure peace and security for the future. So the European Community
was established by six core states, with pre-federal powers and institutions
to provide a framework for that purpose; and it has been deepened to deal
with other problems of interdependence, notably in the economy and the
environment, as well as widened to include most European countries. The
United Kingdom came to participate as a reluctant and anti-federalist
member state, with governments which never understood that the stepwise
but radical reform of powers and institutions to create a working federal
system was required in order to deal with the challenges of increasing
interdependence in Europe and the world.
The global existential challenges
New existential challenges have, however, become more
and more evident, in the fields of security, climate change and economic
globalisation. British people feel as strongly as other Europeans the
need to improve the world system in order to overcome them. But they lack
a clear idea of what to do about it. They sense that American hegemony
is not the answer but have scant conception of what, beyond protesting,
can in fact be done. There are however two ways to avoid absolute hegemony
of the United States, which in the not-so-long run would be as disastrous
for the Americans as for the rest of us.
One is to wait a decade or two in the expectation that
China will become an equivalent superpower which, even if it happens,
would be a dangerous delay in an explosive world and a dangerous combination
in view of the profound differences of political culture and international
experience between Americans and Chinese.
The other is to convert the European Union into a power
at least equivalent to the US in all respects save military capacity,
while substantially developing the Union's military strength as well.
Altiero Spinelli, in his speech to the founding congress
of the UEF at Montreux in August 1947, observed that Marshall Aid was
a remarkable manifestation of liberal America which gave Europeans the
chance to unite. But he predicted that, if a European federation was not
established which could become an equal partner, the United States would
become an imperial America. Slowly but surely his prediction has been
fulfilled.
In its internal affairs, the EU has moved far towards
becoming a federal polity, and the Constitution drafted by the Convention
should take it some steps farther. But in foreign policy and defence it
remains overwhelmingly intergovernmental, thus ineffective and undemocratic.
The British and a number of other governments insist on keeping the veto
over decisions on a common EU policy; and they resist any adequate role
for the Commission and the Parliament, together with the creation of essential
common instruments for policy in these fields. So long as this is the
case, the Union will be unable to bring balance into the global system
and the attempts of member states to exert substantial influence on American
policy will remain fruitless, as will American efforts to bring order
into the affairs of the world. It is naive to suppose that Europeans can
have such influence without the power that can be exercised only by effective
and democratic common institutions endowed with the necessary competences
backed by policy instruments: in fact by a federal European Union.
Only a federal EU can convert American hegemony
into partnership and lead a multipolar world in building effective multilateral
institutions
The Union does already possess quasi-federal powers
and institutions in the fields of trade and aid; and here it is at least
an equal partner with the United States. It has also used its environmental
powers to lead the world, despite intransigent American opposition, in
the first steps towards controlling greenhouse gas emissions enough to
avert potentially catastrophic climate change. With the euro it has an
instrument that should give it similar weight in the international financial
system. But not only is it weakened by the opting out of Denmark, Sweden
and the UK; the member states have also failed to give the Union the powers
it needs to conduct an effective external monetary policy.
These examples illustrate the Union's potential to become
not just equal to the United States but a more powerful actor in fields
other than military might, i.e. in most of the fields that determine whether
the world will become a safer and more prosperous place: in short, the
EU can be the principal partner in matters of 'soft security' just as
the United States is in 'hard security'; and the EU can use its strength
to influence a multipolar world to accept the need for increasingly effective
multilateral and global institutions.
But there is a vast gap between the potential and the
performance, due to the inadequacy of the Union's powers and institutions
which would be remedied by reforms going beyond those in the draft Constitution
to a properly federal Union. Underlying the Union's failure to undertake
these reforms and use its powers to good effect is a failure of vision
as to what a European federation could achieve.
For the influence of a fully federal European Union
offers the world's best hope for dealing with the existential challenge
to a civilised life, and perhaps even to life itself, on this planet.
If this is understood, the British will surely join other Europeans who
are determined that, having exported to the rest of the world Europe's
nation-state system and the wars it generated here, we shall now complete
the process of converting the Union into a truly democratic and effective
federation, and thus together play the key part in meeting the challenges
that confront the world, including the eradication of mass poverty, the
stabilisation of the climate and the establishment of permanent peace.
This article was written by John Pinder, Chairman
of the Federal Trust. John Pinder is the author of numerous books, including
The Building of the European Union and, most recently, The
European Union: a Very Short Introduction. The views expressed in
this article are those of the author and not necessarily those of Federal
Union. November 2003.
|