OeNB Seminar

Es gilt das gesprochene Wort.

The functioning of the EU – challenges the EU faces 

The EU is the victim of its past success, in particular in the socio-economic field. This has made the Union the pole of attraction for other European states and led to the quadrupling of its original membership. However, the present institutional framework no longer meets the requirements of the dramatically grown number of members nor the depth and density of the level of integration reached. 

Thus the Union faces existential challenges with regard to the restructuring of its institutions and working procedures as well as its objectives, i.e. their ranking in terms of priorities. 

As to the institutional set up, the structures of the council and its working procedures demand highest attention. At stake is the ability of the Union of 25 or more members to decide and act efficiently and to develop further. Replacing the requirement of unanimous decisions by majority voting is to be considered crucial. 

Moreover, the function of leadership and coordination has gained a new dimension with enlargement. Here, the presidency is addressed. A possible, chosen President of the European Council of heads of state and government, would, by itself, not solve the problem, since it concerns all Council structures and levels from the European Council down to expert groups. 

The present system of presidency has become inadequate. Its preservation might reduce the legitimate presidency to a mere protocol-function and foster the shifting of real influence and leadership towards an informal dominance by the large states. Thus, the smaller ones in particular should have an interest in a collegial system of team – or group presidencies, which combines burden sharing with a longer duration of the single presidential function. The principle of rotation could be preserved and smaller member states would regularly share in the leadership function – an aspect of considerable importance for the internal political climate. 

As to the Union’s objectives, i.e. their ranking on the priority scale, the impression should be avoided that the realization of a Common foreign, security, and defense policy can realistically be a short term aim. "Speaking with one voice" in world affairs must not be formed into a test for the future viability of the Union in the public’s mind. This must lead to disappointment and frustration with the integration process as such. The installation of a "European Foreign Minister" in itself is to be welcomed. His voice, however, will remain the cumulative voice of member states, only to be raised if and when there is consensus. A genuine common policy in these fields remains a longer term project. 

Political actors as well as media would be well advised to again focus attention and energy on further progress in the field of socio-economic integration. As in the past, socio-economic integration will remain the main source of integration dynamics. It is the ever growing interdependence of European societies and national economies from which the integration process gains its quality of irreversibility and permanence. 

However, there is still much left to be done in the socio-economic field. The new members have to be effectively integrated into the internal market, which in itself is not yet complete. The project of the Economic and Monetary Union has only been effected in part – the realization of the Economic Union in terms of close coordination and concertation of macro-economic policies is still only at its beginning. 

Moreover, we should recall that the architects of the Common Currency have conceived Monetary and Economic Union as a tool for the break-through to Political Union. Their assessment should be taken as valid and the completion of EMU be made the priority in the Union´s efforts.