*** STEN BERGLUND, KJETIL DUVOLD, JOAKIM EKMAN, CARSTEN SCHYMIK: Where Does Europe End? Borders, Limits and Directions of the EU. Edward Elgar Publishing (The Lypiatts, 15 Lansdown Road, Cheltenham, Glos GL50 2JA, UK. Tel: (44-1242) 226934 - fax: 262111 - Email: info@e-elgar.co.uk - Internet: http://www.e-elgar.com ). 2009, 182 pp. ISBN 978-1-84844-332-7.
If it were not for the subtitle, the actual title of this book could lead to a misunderstanding: the problem posed by policy on the final frontiers of European Union is one of the themes tackled by political scientists in this book. The contributions in this talk are written by authors who have gravitated from the University of Humboldt, although three of them now teach at the Swedish universities of Örebro and Södertörn. The fourth has remained a researcher in Berlin at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs. The research project, which brought them all together over two an a half years ago was, from a scientific point of view, highly ambitious because it aims to do no less than identify, “the social, political and geographical frontiers of Europe”. The reader is subsequently taken on an illuminating promenade through the building site of European integration under the cautious and robust guidance of these academics who put forward a series of keys to unlocking the answers to a number of received ideas.
First of all, Sten Berglund explains how the European Union has worked in both a dynamic federalist and intergovernmental way to produce a “hybrid regime” that causes tension resulting from the claimed “democratic deficit”, due to the partisans of a Europe of states pitting themselves against the Union, which “promotes democracy in Europe” and the Union becoming “a democracy in itself”. The former believe that democracy can only exist as a national concept. The Union is also a hybrid of both democracy and bureaucratic despotism, even though this is a, “despotism containing a strongly democratic side to it”. Berglund considers that the most likely scenario is that nothing will change but that the economic and financial crisis over the past few months could provide a boost towards a more politically integrated and democratic Europe if the Union, “manages to mobilise its members” to reduce the impact of the crisis through, “concerted action”. Is it still necessary to “politicise Brussels”, which would mean the Commission (on its own?) promoting a Europeanization of elections and political debates by encouraging current Parliamentary groups to campaign as parties and not as, “cowardly coalitions of parties coming from all the different corners of the European continent”. Given the evidence, this is the voice of reason and implies involvement from national and regional parliaments facilitated by the Lisbon Treaty. This will, perhaps, enable this voice to be given a fair hearing and the different national political parties will consequently have to become more European.
In the same vein, an entire chapter focuses on the, “trajectory of European federalism”, for which the final destination, “ due to a variety of reasons” is “European integration”. Going beyond this both sympathetic and unexpected position (given the current times), Carsten Schymik from Scandinavia examines the experience within the European project in relation to other federal countries, principally the US. He looks at how they were formed, at their borders, the wars they have been involved in and the democracy prevailing in these countries. The author believes that the USA incontestably constitutes one model amongst a number of others. Switzerland with its long experience of “confederalism” has certain similarities with the current state of the Union. It was only through military intervention by Napoleon that the former went beyond this stage but who can say that it will never be confronted by an equivalent threat, either “international terrorism” or “the clash of civilisations” or any other kind of crisis for the Union to follow suit? There is also the question of Great Britain's effect on the US, Pakistan, Canada, India and Nigeria and many other countries. This country has contributed more than any other country in the world to shape the global experience of federalism. Perhaps there is something peculiarly British about the fact that this country has been the main exporter of federalism in the world while it is the most fervent defender of Europe itself not becoming federalist? Perhaps, even if the author has some doubts about it, federalism could come home and the USA could now begin to play a role formerly held by the British Empire …
Features of this kind pepper the other parts of the book and focus on the slow gestation of European society and … the final frontiers of the Union. They always prove pertinent and sometimes even impertinent. The book as a whole, force us to ask ourselves a series of questions and provide much food for thought!
Michel Theys
*** HERVE BRIBOSIA: Réviser les traités européens: plaidoyer en faveur de la suppression du veto. Notre Europe (19 rue de Milan, F-75009 Paris. Tel: (33-1) 44589797 - fax: 44589799 - Email: info@notre-europe.eu - Internet: http://www.notre-europe.eu ). "Policy Papers" series, No. 37. 2009, 38 pp..
Popular wisdom decrees that what is devised effectively, presents itself clearly. In this case, just a few pages are necessary to get to what is essential. This “Policy Paper” was produced by a think-tank set up by Jacques Delors and provides a terrific read. On the basis of reflections made by an experts' group consisting of Professor Bruno De Witte and Renaud Dehousse, as well as institutional craftsmen such as Paolo Ponzano, Hervé Bribosia puts forward in a little under 40 pages - free in both English and French on the Internet site Notre Europe - proposals aimed at proceeding to a radical but necessary reform in the current procedure of revising the treaties and which currently, “allow conservatives and minorities the luxury of blocking any change without proposing any alternative”. Effectively, the authors would like to finish once and for all with the unanimity rule that doubly penalises adaptation of the Union to the changing situation by lowering its ambition (due to final results of the cattle trading at the intergovernmental conference) and systematically turning it into a Damocles Sword of each of the member states in the ratification process. Hervé Bribosia is the head of science at the Centre Virtuel de la Connaissance sur l'Europe; a European treaty ratified by 4/5 of member states and effectively by 4/5 of the Union's population should definitively enter into force, even in countries with misgivings about it, if they are given sufficient guarantees in return. He outlines what they are, as one of the other measures for facilitating the ratification procedure, for example, by involving national parliaments and preventing them being presented with a done deal over the treaty negotiated by their respective governments and which they have to either take or leave. He also looks at the idea of merging the Intergovernmental Conference with the Convention, “in an effort to channel governmental influence” and better takes into account the double legitimacy of the Union based on member states but also, the will of the people. Are these ideas iconoclasts? Judging by the evidence, many would think so. Nonetheless, one is aware of them or at least pretends to ignore the fact that revising the statutes of several international organisations (Council of Europe, United Nations, World Trade Organisation, World Health Organisation, International Labour Organisation and the International Monetary Fund etc.) is barely subject to voting by unanimity, which has been the case for a long time. The approach adopted by the authors could not be accused of being opportunistic and they do not therefore want to, “change the rules of the game” currently being played. Neither is there any fire to be put out, rather, it is precisely the right moment to calmly reflect on how to prevent any other fires starting up.
(MT)
*** MICHELE AFFINITO, GUIA MIGANI, CHRISTIAN WENKEL (Editors): Les deux Europes - The Two Europes. Actes du IIIe colloque international RICHIE - Proceedings of the 3rd international RICHIE conference. Presses Interuniversitaires Européennes / Peter Lang (1 av. Maurice, B-1050 Brussels. Tel: (41-32) 3761717 - fax: 3761727 - Email: pie@peterlang.com - Internet: http://www.peterlang.com ). "Euroclio" series, No. 46. 2009, 359 pp., €38.90. ISBN 978-90-5201-481-4.
Europe it is a territory where many examples of duality exist. Between the two wars, a French pro-European supporter ended up supporting collaboration with the Nazi occupier. Francis Delaisi published a book called “The Two Europes” in which he identified a division between an industrialised Europe and its agricultural counterpart. At the end of the Second World War, this economic duality gave way to a political and ideological duality represented by the East West division. Since the fall of the Iron Curtain and the most recent enlargements of the European Union, these divisions still exist, at least in the minds and in the way we look at the world and … at Europe. This is, in any case, one of the themes explored at the third international colloquy organised in Naples in December 2007 by the Richie Association, “an international network of young researchers exploring the history of European integration” set up in 2004 by a group of European university academics seeking to facilitate the dissemination of information and collaboration in this arena. This book brings together contributions around four reflection themes: Eastern Europe versus Western Europe, Europe the dream versus Europe the reality, political Europe(s) versus economic Europe(s)and Europe as a power versus Europe as an instrument of power in the hands of member states. It is of course impossible to provide a totally comprehensive review of the impressive work contained in this book and which provide keys to understanding key moments of European history and which are very useful for correctly analysing the current situation. The essays provided by Mauve Carbonell deserves a specific mention. They are varied and sometimes even antagonistic towards members of the High Authority who seek to be “Europeans above all else” and have developed a “European identity by absorbing the weight of the past”.
(MT)
*** SANDRINE DEVAUX, RENÉ LEBOUTTE, PHILIPPE POIRIER (Eds.): Le Traité de Rome: histoires pluridisciplinaires. L'apport du Traité de Rome instituant la Communauté économique européenne. Presses Interuniversitaires Européennes/Peter Lang (see above).'Cité européenne' series, No. 40. 2009, 208 pp, €26.90. ISBN 978-90-5201-500-2.
This fine volume follows on from a forum organised by the Luxembourg Institute and the Pierre Werner Institute in the spring of 2007, examining on the fiftieth anniversary of the Treaty of Rome the 'roots and development of EU governance.' The event had the great merit of bringing together academics from across the board (history, law, politics and sociology) along with key players of the day, in other words extremely useful 'vestiges' because, as Georges Berthoin, former chief of cabinet office for Jean Monnet at the High Authority, explains in the introduction, 'like any other form of archaeology, political archaeology helps one find the origins and therefore at a time of dilly-dallying, puts one on a firmer footing for addressing the future.' The first part of the book examines the key impulse for the new 'governance in Europe' that was the Treaty of Rome, explained in the light of contributions from federalist activists, 'small' EU countries and the European Investment Bank which, along with the European Social Fund, was a symbol of the desire of the six Member States of the time to build a 'social market economy'. The second section looks more directly at the issue surrounding governance to be taken up today, paying tribute to judges at the European Court of Justice who, with their case law logic and judicial activism, are described as 'the creators of Europe'. Integration continues apace and governments were to 'discover that the European genie could not be put back in the bottle.' All governments were aware that 'to move backwards would mean collective suicide'. Georges Berthoin therefore suggests that they admit today something that was unthinkable in the past, namely 'the idea that two sovereignties can back each other up,' which would legitimise a limited right to veto that is limited to essential issues.
(MT)
*** ALMUT-BARBARA RENGER, ROLAND ALEXANDER ISSLER (Editors): Europa-Stier und Sternenkranz. Von der Union mit Zeus zum Staatenverbund. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht / University Press (13 Theaterstrasse, D-37073 Göttingen. Tel: (49-551) 5084-40 - fax: 5084-422 - Email: info@v-r.de - Internet: http://www.v-r.de ). 2009. 656 pp., 72 illustrations, €77.90. ISBN 978-3-89971-566-8.
This book is the sum total of an important project that aim to provide a synthesis of different branches of knowledge in a specific domain. The domain is Europe, and the Phoenician princess who kidnapped Zeus, according to Greek mythology, but who is also contemporary Europe in the process of being built treaty by treaty and from where Taurus, the Crown of Stars and the Union of Zeus are linked to that of our different European peoples. 35 authors from nine different nationalities, academics from different disciplines, each present a contribution on this question in their own language: German (in the majority), English, French and Italian, so that the reading of this book is not just a way of enriching one's knowledge on such a vast subject but also a multilingual exercise. It is impossible to summarise and evaluate this book in any detail. Let's hope that the specialists from the different disciplines will share their critical analysis. The first chapter of the book illustrates the origins behind the myth of Europe in literature and art. The following chapters take the reader on a tour, accompanied by “Mme Europe”, through the continent's history up until the Concert of Nations and the European Union. An excellent synthesis by Professor Odile Wattel de Croizant (Paris) should be singled out and which in less than around 20 pages presents the successive interpretations of the myths of Europe and their use by authors, artists and those holding the reins of power. The Europe in which we live today is a zone of economic integration and political cooperation and is discussed very succinctly by several of the different philosophers. After reading the more than 600 pages, we might be just regret that this huge volume is called tome (I) and there will be (at least) another tome (II). “Europe” still needs to be taken off somewhere … let's hope we find it again!
(J-RR)