Why Europe Became EU-Rope_ by Faton Raci

8/9/2019 Why Europe Became EU-Rope_ by Faton Raci

1/10

JOUR 616: Media, European Integration and GlobalisationLecturer: Obrad SavicMA candidate: Faton Rai

30 September 2009

Why Europe became EU-rope?

(The rise of nationalism in EU member-states, what wentwrong, and how the movement towards future Europe might be

restored?)

Introduction

We all remember the Cold War era and the collapse of Eastern Communist Block

in 1989. The fall of the Berlin Wall represented a symbolic step towards liberty for all

Eastern European states. Hence, the soft blanket of euphoria soon after covered the Old

Continent; Europe was finally united!

Twenty years later, instead of 12 of the then European Community the nowadays

European Union (EU) has 27 member-states, not to mention plans for further extension

of its borders. Majority of ex-Eastern European states are integrated within the EU,

except six new states derived from ex-Yugoslavia (as Slovenia has already entered the

EU) and few problematic ones, mostly bordering Russia, as Moldova, Ukraine and

Georgia, for instance. Even though the delay in integration of ex-Yugoslav countries is

often credited to their unsolved national relations as well as to un-fulfillment of

1


2/10

numerous EU standards and procedures, integration of the quite distant eastern

countries caused by evident lack of compliance between Unions member-states. Hence,

one of the main reasons for hesitation towards further enlargement of the EU, besides

global financial crises being main Unions excuse, is internal discrepancy among the EU

member-states concerning its perspective and form. Consequently, some of the EU

member-states failed to ratify the EU constitution, although it was signed in 2004.

On the other hand, the rise of nationalistic feelings toward the Others within the

EU countries may, in my opinion, is the other important reason for interruption of

further enlargement of the EU. One may found this argument as inconsistent, knowing

that the EU is primarily built over the principles of cosmopolitanism. However the

problem itself is not hiding within those cosmopolitan regulations and principles, but in

quite heterogeneous societies which are part of the EU, and in the fear of native citizens

of its member-states from losing their traditions, national identity and status due to theOthers mostly represented by inflowing immigrants from other continents, and by the

newcomers entering the EU from new member-states. As a result of this xenophobia,

even in the most democratic EU countries the populist feelings and the antagonism

towards all kind of foreigners are rising rapidly. In fact nowadays common Westerners

viewpoint is that immigration needs to be prohibited, or at least limited, in order to save

their economic prosperity, jobs, and, even worst, to protect the safety, law and order in

respective EU countries.

Thus, although the EU aim remains the actual finalization of its federalization,some of member-states are, in parallel, fearful of their future status within that

federation. Such perceptions are often coupled with the rise of nationalistic feelings

toward the Others within those communities. Furthermore, although signed by all

Union member-states in 2004, the Constitution of the EU has failed to be ratified by the

citizens of couple of important EU states.1

Why is this happening? Why the EU now faces this mixed form of fear, panic, and

new nationalisms? What has triggered the appearance of xenophobia and neo-

nationalism in modern Europe? Do the disintegration of Eastern Europe and the inflow

of cheap working force from there have to do with this? Is it the fear from the unknown

or it is something else?

This essay aims to provide few arguments and answers linked to these dilemmas.

1 Europe, The European Union Online, [Accessed on 20 July 2009]

2
http://europa.eu/abc/12lessons/index_en.htmhttp://europa.eu/abc/12lessons/index_en.htm


3/10

Initial hopes transformed into disappointment and nationalism

The ratification of the Treaty for the European Union, on 7 February 1992 in

Maastricht (Netherlands) was indeed a historical event for European integration. It

transformed the European Community into the European Union (EU), prompting its

member-states to create a time-schedule for full integration of their economies and

monetary systems. The Treaty also expanded the influence of the EU toward joint foreign

policy and defense, and it created collaboration in the fields of criminal prosecution and

law enforcement. Soon after a numerous other conventions and agreements were signed

between the EU member-states; such as the establishment of the Joint European

Market, on 1 January 1993 - which introduced the freedom to trade goods, services,

labor, and money; the Schengen Agreement, in 1995 which enabled the travelers to

travel among participating states,2 without presenting their passports at formal border

crossings; the Treaty of Amsterdam whose aim was to create the political and

institutional conditions to enable the European Union to meet the challenges of the

future such as the rapid evolution of the international situation, the globalization of the

economy and its impact on jobs, the fight against terrorism, international crime and

drug trafficking, ecological problems and threats to public health;3 Finally, in January

1999, the EU introduced its common currency Euro. The EU market was thus united.

In parallel, the EU has constantly expanded its borders by accepting new

members, mostly from the Central and Eastern Europe. Logical consequence of such

move, in the economical sphere, was further expansion of the Euro-market, which was a

good news for all Unions member-states. The Bad news was that by accepting new

member-states from ex-Eastern Block the internal EU market suddenly became full of

cheap working force. Old Europe suddenly felt panicked. When on the top of all this we

add an increased inflow of the illegal immigrants from the peripheral zones of Africa and

Asia, and the proclaimed War on Terror by U.S. President George W. Bush, its clearthat somewhat multi-dynamic events are happening at once - in a continent not so

familiar with such dramatic changes.

2 Although initially singed by France, Germany, Belgium, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands, 24 states hassigned the Schengen Agreement until know, including some none EU states, such as Iceland, Norway, andSwitzerland3 See Europe, The European Union Online

3


4/10

Paradoxically, the beginning of the 21 century marks a rapid emergence of the

radical right and neo-nationalism movements in the majority of EU countries.

Dr. Zagorka Golubovic4 in her text concerning The Implications of the Conflict in

Ex-Yugoslavia for the European Security, emphasis: I think that both Western and

Eastern Europe believed that once the communist regimes have been eliminated, the

question of a democratic transformation and integration of the countries of real

socialism into the European Community would be more or less automatic - but

developments proved them wrong.5 And she was right since, although unexpected after

the wars in ex-Yugoslavia, radical right parties of Jean-Marie LePens Front National

(France), Silvio Belusconis coalition North Alliance and Forza-Italia (Italy), Joerg

Heiders Freie Democratiche Partei (Austria), and other similar right-wing parties

suddenly emerged strong within the EU. They all promised to their compatriots

protection from the unemployment and protection of their national interests. These weretwo biggest concerns that in fact most of the EU citizens had after the latest enlargement

of the Union in 2004, when ten new countries entered the Union 6at once. Hereto, the

main disturbance is not the appearance of radical parties as such, but the tactics that

neo-nationalists chose for achieving those goals. Their main focus was/is promotion of

totally opposite standards compared to Unions policy, mostly in a form of Euro-

skepticism which includes defense of national interests and traditions, and promotion of

strong anti-immigration policy.

The left's idea is of a multi-ethnic Italy. Thats not our idea, ours is to welcomeonly those who meet the conditions for political asylum,7Silvio Berlusconi, the Italian

Prime Minister, argued quite recently. Its easy to find lots of similar pronouncements

from LePen, Heider, etc, but when such a thing is being said by the current Prime

Minister of an EU member-state it certainly weights differently. Thought, it seems ironic

how neo-nationalists persistently forget a very important element, that it is nationalism

which engenders nations, and not the other way round.8

4

Dr. Zagorka Golubovic is Serbia's veteran dissident from the Communist era and former professor ofSociology and Anthropology at University of Belgrade, Yugoslavia5 Zagorka Golubovic, Implikacije Konflikta u Bivsoj Jugoslaviji za Evropsku Sigurnost, Web-Source: [Accessed on 10 September 2009]6 In 2004 ten new countries has joined the EU: Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia,Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia, and Slovenia7 Deepa Babington, Berlusconi's Anti-immigration Comments Spur Outcry, Reuters, (Rome: 10 May 2009),Web-Source: [Accessed on 25 July 2009]8 Ernest Gellner, Nations and Nationalism, (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1983), p.55

4
http://147.91.230.48/ifdt/izdanja/casopisi/ifdt/IX-X/D32/documenthttp://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE5491CC20090510?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=0http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE5491CC20090510?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=0http://147.91.230.48/ifdt/izdanja/casopisi/ifdt/IX-X/D32/documenthttp://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE5491CC20090510?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=0http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE5491CC20090510?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=0


5/10

Nevertheless, even though it was thought that the EU is moving confidently

toward the realization of its final goals: federalization of Europe and creation of new

European identity, the appearance of neo-nationalism, supported by a numerous

European citizens, proved that something needs to be changed. So, even though the

European market was united in 1999 by the introduction of its common currency, it

seems that political Europe is still not. Moreover, it seems more divided then twenty

years ago. Ironically this time it is divided within itself. Current neo-nationalism at an

institutionalized level (political parties, NGOs, lobby groups, etc.) represents a direct

threat for Union itself, as it directly attacks its most valid values, through organizing

anti-EU campaigns and anti-immigrant movements. Or, as Marcus Banks and Andre

Gingrich define:

By opening up new discursive fields of conflict, and of radicalredefinition, these ne-nationalist leaderships were capable of creating new

forms of public awareness about the nations allegedly insecure presence

and future.9

Some seventy years ago, before the World War II, similar rampant fueling of

nationalism and ethnic hatred led to creation of fascist regimes, invasions, and genocide,

and to ethnic cleansing during 1990s in ex-Yugoslavia. Hence its not surprising that

many Europeans fear from the repetition of such scenario, even though some prominentthinkers dont share that opinion, as they think that theres no reason for panic. For Eric

Hobsbawm10, for instance, it is not the threat from the extreme right..., though clearly

there is a shift to the right, and centre-right governments are likely to make more

concessions to the far right. The real story is the crisis of the left.11 That is to say,

Hobsbawms main concern today in not the similarity of situation to the one of 1930s,

but the European leftists need for reorganization. Hobsbawms argument may be

reasonable as leftists totally oppose to the neo-nationalists, by propagating equality

among citizens, regardless of any kind of their descent. But, according to a workshop of

9 Andre Gingrich, Marcus Banks, Neo-nationalism in Europe and Beyond, (Berghahn Books, 2006), p.16,Web-source: [Accessed on 25 August 2009]10 Among many other books, Eric Hobsbawm is the author ofThe Age of Extremes: The Short TwentiethCentury (1914-1991).11 Stephen Moss and John Crace, Is fascism on the march again?, The Guardian, (London: 9 June 2009),Web-source: [Accessed on20 July 2009]

5
http://books.google.com/books?id=zScJs9HjixQC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_v2_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=&f=falsehttp://books.google.com/books?id=zScJs9HjixQC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_v2_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=&f=falsehttp://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/jun/09/bnp-fascism-meps-far-righthttp://books.google.com/books?id=zScJs9HjixQC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_v2_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=&f=falsehttp://books.google.com/books?id=zScJs9HjixQC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_v2_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=&f=falsehttp://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/jun/09/bnp-fascism-meps-far-right


6/10

Networking European Citizenship Education, Even extreme nationalists are still mostly

at least nominally committed to Europe, which gives the European Union some power

over their policies.12 This claim is clearly emphasizing further urgent need for action by

the EU, because current inactivity in fulfilling its goals has created a fertile ground for

neo-nationalists to enter EU and act from inside. The epistemologist and Professor of

Philosophy at the University of Tilburg in the Netherlands, Herman de Regt, couple of

days before last elections for the European Parliament (held on 4 June 2009) raised

further skepticism, by claiming that to believe that we can move the Union forward by

thinking on the question of Europes identity could well be a disastrous mistake.13

Dutchman De Regt in fact doesnt negate the European Union as such, but he is arguing

that:

National politicians should see about finding new ways to explainthe importance of the European Union to its citizens. For no-one can

blame us for leaving the club if it has nothing to offer us.14

Hereupon, it seems that European citizens somewhat feel that theyve gave

something to the EU (their nationality) and they didnt get nothing back. One may thus

ask how come that after 20 years of its existence the EU citizens are facing such

dilemmas and contradictions? What might be the solution?

It is obvious that current form of the EU, initially designed just for 12 member-states,15 is suffering under the heavy weight of the new 15 newcomers, with quite diverse

political, cultural and historical backgrounds. If we add to these the discordance between

firm market integration and loose political integration of national governments, then

current structural problems, combined with, as Jurgen Habermas states, a

corresponding deficit in the democratic legitimatization of EU decisions,16are certainly

12 Stefan Auer, The Culture of Memory in Europe the Foundationfor the Integration of Europe, workshop ofNetworking European Citizenship Education: The Impacts ofNational Identities for European Integration as a Focus of Citizenship Education, (Melbourne: InnovativeUniversities European Union (IUEU) Centre,La Trobe University, 11 September 2007), p.4, Web-source: [Accessed on 1 September 2009]13 Herman de Regt, Europe Doesnt Exists, Press Europe, (Brussels: 1 June 2009), Web-Source: [Accessed on 25 July 2009]14 Ibid15 European Council declarations, Laeken Declaration on the Future of the European Union, (Brussels: 28

February 2002, The Convention meeting chaired by Mr. Valery Giscard dEstaing) Web-Source: [Accessed on 27 July 2009]16 Jurgen Habermas, Why Europe Needs a Constitution,New Left Review 11 (September-October 2001) p.13, Web- Source: [Accessed on 2 September 2009]

6
http://www.bpb.de/files/8GCANP.pdfhttp://www.presseurop.eu/en/content/article/12011-europe-doesnt-existhttp://ec.europa.eu/justice_home/unit/charte/en/declarations-laeken.htmlhttp://www.newleftreview.org/A2343http://www.bpb.de/files/8GCANP.pdfhttp://www.presseurop.eu/en/content/article/12011-europe-doesnt-existhttp://ec.europa.eu/justice_home/unit/charte/en/declarations-laeken.htmlhttp://www.newleftreview.org/A2343


7/10

not so unexpected. In fact many citizens of diverse EU states are not feeling that theyre

part of the European project anymore. Habermas hence considers that for the EU to

remain a stable and lasting political community, it is essential that citizens identify

themselves with the organization.17

Meanwhile, the EU seemed to have underestimated Europes radical right and

the possible awakening of nationalist consciousness among its citizens. Consequently,

the European rightists have used somewhat distant interrelation between the EU

bureaucracy and its citizens, as well as the panic and xenophobia that embraced them by

EU enlargement towards Central and Eastern Europe, to enter the stage.

Many citizens were also critical about the increased powers of EU institutions, as

they perceive them being beyond control of any national government of the member-

states. Thus they felt somewhat left aside and betrayed by the EU. This gap was soon

after filled by the Euro-rightists, who, with the motto of protection of national interestsfrom the Others achieved to benefit from such situation. If we carefully analyze the

events, it is easy to observe that the latest result, and probably the strongest effect, of

such protection was refusal to ratify the EU Constitution by France and the

Netherlands, in 2005. Since then the EU is, instead of concentrating into further

enlargement and development, mostly trying to reunify itself.

Conclusion

What might be then the strongest blow in the faces of the Euro-neo-nationalists?

The answer may be hiding in swift ratification of the EU constitution. Jurgen

Habermas argues that a European constitution would not only make manifest the shift

in powers that has already taken place. It would also release and foster further shifts.18

Bearing this in mind, its realistic to expect the re-establishment of ties between the EU

bureaucracy and the citizens. This would for sure release current EU-rope and open

further perspectives for the Union. The subsequent execution of the Lisbon Treaty would

for sure leave the Euro-rightists and the Euro-skeptics without their main Joker: that thevision of United Europe is just an utopist dream.

Furthermore, the eventual continuation and completion of the membership

negotiations with the Western Balkans and Turkey would represent an extra kick for the

neo-nationalist concept of Europe, as it would for sure reconfirm the cosmopolitanism of

17 Ibid, p. 618 Ibid

7


8/10

the EU as well the restoration of confidence of its citizens with the non-European

cultural or ethnical background. Only then would Europe become united politically.

Besides, the constitution would create a possibility for the EU to have its President and

its Prime Minister, as well as to, probably, limit its citizens in bearing just European

nationality, instead of two (the EU and national) as they do now.

When being asked about his vision of Europes political structure after 50 years,

in an interview for Signandsight.com,19Habermas replied:

A bold vision for 50 years down the line will not help us get on

right now. I am content with a vision for the period leading up to the

European elections in 2009. Those elections should be coupled with a

Europe-wide referendum on three questions: whether the Union, beyond

effective decision-making procedures, should have a directly electedpresident, its own foreign minister, and its own financial base. That is

what Belgium's Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt advocates. Such a

proposal would pass muster if it won a "double majority" of EU member-

states and of individual citizens' votes. At the same time, the referendum

would be binding only on those EU member-nations in which a majority

of citizens had voted for the reforms. If the referendum were to succeed, it

would mean the abandonment of the model of Europe as a convoy in

which the slowest vehicle sets the pace for all. But even in a Europeconsisting of a core and a periphery, those countries which prefer to

remain on the periphery for the time being would of course retain the

option of becoming part of the core at any time.20

Hence, if the EU achieves to create its aim, a strong and cosmopolitan United

States of Europe 21within which its citizens will feel being its part and identified as

Europeans, the neo-nationalists will certainly loose the groundwork. Certainly, this is

not a new discovery as it functions perfectly in the U.S. Nobody there identifies himself

as a Californian, Texasian, Arizonian, etc. Theyre all Americans, including those with a

19Signandsight.com is the English language service ofperlentaucher.de, the largest cultural online magazinein German language. Jurgen Habermas gave the interview in 2007.

20Matthias Hoenig, What Europe Needs Now, signandsight.com, (Berlin: 23 March 2007),

[Accessed on 14 September 2009]

21 Ibid

8
http://www.perlentaucher.de/http://www.signandsight.com/features/1265.htmlhttp://www.perlentaucher.de/http://www.signandsight.com/features/1265.html


9/10

totally different cultural and ethnical background/descent - similar with nowadays

desperate immigrants whore, despite all of this hatred, perseveringly trying to enter the

EU.

9


10/10

List of References:

- Andre Gingrich, Marcus Banks, Neo-nationalism in Europe and Beyond, (Oxford, New York:

Berghahn Books, 2006), p.16, Web-source:

- Deepa Babington, Berlusconi's Anti-immigration Comments Spur Outcry, Reuters, (Rome: 10May 2009), Web-Source:

- Ernest Gellner, Nations and Nationalism, (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1983), p.55

- European Council Declarations, Laeken Declaration on the Future of the European Union,(Brussels: 28 February 2002, The Convention meeting chaired by Mr Valery Giscard dEstaing)

Web-Source:

- Europe, The European Union Online,

- Herman de Regt, Europe Doesnt Exists, Press Europe, (Brussels: 1 June 2009), Web-Source:

- Jurgen Habermas, Why Europe Needs a Constitution,New Left Review 11 (September-October2001) p. 13, Web- Source:

- Matthias Hoenig, What Europe Needs Now, signandsight.com, (Berlin: 23 March 2007),

- Stefan Auer, The Culture of Memory in Europe the Foundation for the Integration of Europe,Workshop of Networking European Citizenship Education: The Impacts of National Identities

for European Integration as a Focus of Citizenship Education, (Melbourne: InnovativeUniversities European Union (IUEU) Centre, La Trobe University, 11 September 2007), p.4, Web-source:

- Stephen Moss and John Crace, Is fascism on the march again?, The Guardian, (London: 9 June2009), Web-source:

- Zagorka Golubovic, Implikacije Konflikta u Bivsoj Jugoslaviji za Evropsku Sigurnost, Web-Source:

10
http://books.google.com/books?id=zScJs9HjixQC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_v2_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=&f=falsehttp://books.google.com/books?id=zScJs9HjixQC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_v2_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=&f=falsehttp://books.google.com/books?id=zScJs9HjixQC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_v2_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=&f=falsehttp://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE5491CC20090510?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChanel=0http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE5491CC20090510?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChanel=0http://ec.europa.eu/justice_home/unit/charte/en/declarations-laeken.htmlhttp://europa.eu/abc/12lessons/index_en.htmhttp://www.presseurop.eu/en/content/article/12011-europe-doesnt-existhttp://www.newleftreview.org/A2343http://www.signandsight.com/features/1265.htmlhttp://www.bpb.de/files/8GCANP.pdfhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/jun/09/bnp-fascism-meps-far-righthttp://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/jun/09/bnp-fascism-meps-far-righthttp://147.91.230.48/ifdt/izdanja/casopisi/ifdt/IX-X/D32/documenthttp://books.google.com/books?id=zScJs9HjixQC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_v2_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=&f=falsehttp://books.google.com/books?id=zScJs9HjixQC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_v2_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=&f=falsehttp://books.google.com/books?id=zScJs9HjixQC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_v2_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=&f=falsehttp://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE5491CC20090510?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChanel=0http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE5491CC20090510?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChanel=0http://ec.europa.eu/justice_home/unit/charte/en/declarations-laeken.htmlhttp://europa.eu/abc/12lessons/index_en.htmhttp://www.presseurop.eu/en/content/article/12011-europe-doesnt-existhttp://www.newleftreview.org/A2343http://www.signandsight.com/features/1265.htmlhttp://www.bpb.de/files/8GCANP.pdfhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/jun/09/bnp-fascism-meps-far-righthttp://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/jun/09/bnp-fascism-meps-far-righthttp://147.91.230.48/ifdt/izdanja/casopisi/ifdt/IX-X/D32/document

Documents

Why Europe Became EU-Rope_ by Faton Raci