*** JUSTINE LACROIX: La pensée française à l'épreuve de l'Europe. Editions Grasset (61 rue des Saints-Pères, F-75006 Paris. Internet: http://www.grasset.fr ). "Mondes vécus" series. 2008, 131 pp, €10.90. ISBN 978-2-246-73381-2.
In this brief, densely-packed exegetically-aimed essay, Justine Lacroix, who is professor of political science at the 'Université Libre de Bruxelles' in Belgium, explains what lies behind the controversies that have dogged the European project in French political thought since the 1992 and 2005 referendum campaigns. In her view, the question of "place" - in the sense of a territory set apart by defined borders - is now at the heart of the theoretical questionings in France about the legitimacy of integration. The author also notes, as a backdrop to this question of borders, an even more fundamental controversy about the significance to be accorded to "rights" within a democratic body - "whether Europe is to be seen as the symptom of a religion of law that is undermining democracy today or is rather to be denounced for its inability to make human rights effective, rights that it never stops demanding".
Justine Lacroix finds the foundations and springboard for her analysis in the work of philosopher Claude Lefort who, at the end of the 1970s, saw human rights as the cornerstone of Western democracy. Slamming Karl Marx for seeing human rights as no more than the rights "of egotistical human beings, of human beings separated off from human beings and the collective," Claude Lefort describes human rights as the vector of a collective and social ideological dynamic that forces the democratic state to be the permanent theatre of a challenging "that is formed in an area which power cannot entirely hold sway over". For Lefort, democracy is clearly "the constantly renewed crossing of the limits that the state has claimed to define for itself" and would force the state to drop "the unity obsession" that characterised traditional regimes and has been exacerbated by totalitarianism, leading to a situation whereby "democracies tacitly turns power into a vacuum, stipulating that it belongs to nobody by right".
This interpretation remains at the heart of French theoretical debates about contemporary democracy these days and leads to very different readings of the European integration process. One initial current of thought that the author describes as "neo-Tocquevillian" argues against Lefort that the vitality of pluralist society could turn against democracy itself in the long-run because by focussing on the individual and the individual's interests and rights, one runs the risk of erasiing the political benchmarks that formed the democratic process. For these thinkers, people like Marcel Gauchet and Pierre Manent, "disincarnated Europe", without a "body" because deprived of what is at the heart of any political community, "namely a feeling of belonging to the same political project and strong identification with people one sees as compatriots," accentuates the "dissolving power of human rights" at the same time as it incarnates the pertinence of denunciations of the damaging effects of exacerbated individualism. Directly opposed to this reading, there are authors who radicalise Lefort's definition of democracy as a vacuum, an empty space, and who, like philosopher Etienne Balibar, initially considered the European project as an opportunity to renew democratic ambition, being called upon to resuscitate the initial radicalism of the 1789 Declaration (of the French Revolution). For this movement, which the author describes as "Spinoza-ist," Europe was designed as an "area" - rather than a "body" - where democratisation and a shrinking of the importance of borders could take place. Hence the disillusion that is now felt about the "failed Europe," a European Union that far from shrinking the idea of closure, as the first movement of thought fears, is rather constantly consolidating such closure. By introducing into each national area discrimination between two categories of foreigners - those from within the EU and those from outside - these philosophers believe the European Union is favouring the emergence of a new form of 'otherness' or even a 'European apartheid' at exactly the same time as it claims to be making progress in terms of universalism. The police control of external EU borders makes the European area ever more resemble a genuine "territory" to be defended against the new "enemy" today of refugees and immigrant workers, destroying the moral claims, according to the authors, of a Europe that claims to be 'cosmopolitan'.
Between these two opposing positions, the author discerns another category in the middle but slightly on the fringes of the French scene, namely that of neo-Kantian authors who, following in the wake of Jürgen Habermas in the person of philosophers like Jean-Marc Ferry and Gérard Mairet, consider European law as "the legal area of recognition between the peoples of Europe." In their view, law should not be seen as "the sign of a diluting of politics," but rather as a "vector to civilise conflict between European states". This "Europe rêvée" leads Justine Lacroix to observe in the conclusion that the European Union probably does not promise the "construction of a new identity situated outside the nation state," but rather forces the various national identities, by means of things like European citizenship and the principle of non-discrimination between citizens of an EU Member State and citizens of other EU Member States, to "change and agree to decentre".
Michel Theys
*** Revue politique et parlementaire. Société d'Édition Académique et Diplomatique (3 rue Bellini, F-92800 Puteaux. Tel: (33-1) 46981374 - Fax: 47730148 - Internet: http://www.revuepolitique.fr ). January/March 2008, No. 1046, 160 pp, €24. Annual subscription: €61 (France), €75 (elsewhere). ISBN 978-2-85702-161-2.
Most of this issue is devoted to the subject of the French Presidency of the European Union that started on 1 July 2008, starting with a rather irritating jocular style in which the author of the editorial dares to write: "Inheritors of Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Victor Hugo, the French have to come forward with elements of a new social contract in order to shape the type of European Union that we want". Fortunately the publication does not continue in the same style. For example, MEP Alain Lamassoure seizes the opportunity to align the French with the EU by pointing out that EU member states 'only' ever chair the EU Council of Ministers and therefore the European Council for six months, and that the European project remains "team work". He stresses in passing that "sharing the same natural Chauvinism, political leaders and media observers in the country responsible for the presidency hugely overestimate their country's room for manoeuvre in what is in the end a highly thankless task". How could one be more cruel, except by adding that the success of a presidency depends on "the quality of its leaders and the organisation they set up," and the capacity of those taking their turn to chair the EU to "forget their national interests and focus instead on European Community interest alone - a condition often forgotten by the incumbents, and their national media"? Humility and a team spirit are therefore necessary, explains Lamassoure, rightly pointing out that 'small' countries (Luxembourg is exemplary here) tend to chair the EU better than 'big' countries, the worst example of which in recent years was the way the United Kingdom in 2005 under Tony Blair managed the question of the EU's Financial Perspectives (budget) for 2007-2013, a time when Tony Blair forgot "the fundamental rule that presidencies are stronger if they are able to get the common interest to prevail over national interests" (the UMP MEP argues that Albion was not only 'perfidious' but also 'murderous': "Should one believe that this is too much to expect of a Brit, even one who claims to be as European as Tony Blair?"). Many other essays are equally interesting, without the vitriol. Contributors include Commissioners Barrot, Figel and Wallström, former French foreign minister Hubert Védrine, French parliamentarians like Hubert Haenel and Pierre Lequiller, and former right-hand-man of Chancellor Kohl of Germany, Joachim Bitterlich.
(MT)
*** JAN WERTS: The European Council. John Harper Publishing (27 Palace Gates Road, London N22 7BW, UK. Internet: http://www.johnharperpublishing.co.uk ). 2008, 271 pp. ISBN 978-0-9556202-1-8.
Written by a journalist who has covered some 130 meetings of the European Council since 1974 and is aware that it can be difficult to understand what is really happening in the corridors of power of the European Council, which will not really become a true European Council unless and until the Lisbon Treaty comes into force, this book is vital reading for anyone trying to understand the European Council, its history and how it works. Jan Werts' book is divided into five sections - the origins of the European Council and its rise in power; how it works; its great successes and failures; and its role within an enlarged European Union and future prospects. Trying to explain the irrepressible rise of the European Council to become the EU's supreme political body, the author makes use of a multitude of sources of information to ensure his analysis is as comprehensive as possible - personal experience, doctoral theses, press conferences given by heads of state and other participants at the summits, various documents, interviews with participants and representatives of the European institutions, etc, etc, leaving no stone unturned. Jan Werts also discusses the consequences of the arrival of the European Council in terms of the Community Method and the balance of power between the European Commission, European Parliament and Council of Ministers, arguing that it has changed the role of these institutions and has also changed essential aspects of their work. Clearly a reference book.
(TBa)
*** JULIAN PRIESTLEY: Six Battles that Shaped Europe's Parliament. John Harper Publishing (see above). 2008, 221 pp. ISBN 978-0-9556202-3-2.
Secretary General of the European Parliament from 1997 to 2007, Julian Priestley has written a highly personal contribution to the literature on the first supranational democratic body the world has ever known, the European Parliament. It is a very detailed description of what he sees as the six battles that have shaped the European Parliament in the form we know it today. The battles are divided into two categories and followed by reflection on future challenges to be tackled by MEPs. Priestley starts by describing three major events - the battle for budgetary power, the battle for legislative power (incarnated by the EP's challenging of the directive on public takeover bids) and the forced resignation of the Santer Commission in 1999. The author then looks at three more drawn-out battles, namely the battle to enter the ring that saw the EP gradually move from being a bit player to become a full member of the European decision-making triangle, the battle to obtain the power to appoint the president and members of the European Commission, and the internal reform battle involving the battle to define MEPs' terms and conditions. This selection may seem rather arbitrary and only sheds light on a section of the historical progress achieved by the European Parliament, but the author justifies his choice by the fact that it is more useful to describe a handful of episodes in detail to illustrate progress rather than trying to give a more comprehensive account that would inevitably have to remain general. Although admitting not having been involved in all six events in equal measure, Julian Priestley clearly achieves his aim and has undoubtedly provided a reliable account of the history of the European Parliament.
(TBa)
*** ZOE LEFKOFRIDI: An Integrated Model of National Party Response to European Integration. Institute for Advanced Studies, University of Vienna (56 Stumpergasse, A-1060 Vienna. Tel: (43-1) 59991-237 - Fax: 59991-555 - Internet: http: //http://www.ihs.ac.at ). "Political Science Series", No. 115. 2008, 31 pp, €8.
What do theories say about the European project's impact on political parties in the Member States? How can research contribute to understanding of the changes that are occurring? This brief study aims to build a sounder theoretical bridge between two important bodies of literature, namely research into the Europeanisation of parties and general theories of change in political parties. The author explains that the report asks whether change has been brought about by the European integration process and if so, how has it worked and to what extent. The concept of Europeanisation is defined at the start and the author moves on to review theories of change in political parties. Discussing the differences in Europeanisation in terms of 'awareness' and 'action', the researcher then builds a model to explain the variation in responses by the parties to European stimuli. She considers the type of party most affected by Europeanisation and the reasons for these differences, attributing them to internal power struggles within the parties and the nature of their main objectives. The author provides part of the missing link in the chain of understanding the Europeanisation of parties, indicating that the results require empirical examination into the length of time that national political parties' responses to European stimuli persist.
(TBa)
*** ALEXANDRE BARTHON DE MONTBAS, AURELIEN LECHEVALLIER: L'Europe en question(s). Ellipses Edition (32 rue Bargue, F-75740 Paris cedex 15. Tel: (33-1) 45677419 - Fax: 47346794 - Internet: http://www.editions-ellipses.fr ). "Transversale Débats" series. 2008, 278 pp, €14-50. ISBN 978-2-7298-3809-6.
This books shows that certain egg-heads, French top-ranking intellectuals and their consorts are capable of descending from their intellectual ivory towers to address the general public in an intelligible and (of course) reliable manner. In clear, simple, user-friendly style, the authors have written thirteen chapters on various aspects of the European project, like its genesis, institutions, decision-making, the Lisbon Treaty and the EU budget. The second part of the book looks in a similar vein at common policies, and the third part at the EU's place in the world. Dynamic, eye-catching layout helps readers understand the ins and outs of issues like a putative EU tax and helps make the book an extremely useful teaching tool.
(PBo)