Europe - Strong Union or Weak Sample of Nations

Europe вЂ" Strong Union or Weak Sample of Nations

Imagine that one has a little stick which is easy to break it. Now imagine that one has around twenty seven sticks, it could be really hard to break them. However, why are these questions being asked? Working together as a team can bring several advantages, and success can be reached faster than a single person, but even better results can be achieved with a whole

union working together. Of course, it may be difficult to end at a common idea of what a team is trying to do but in the end that decisions would be stronger and results would be more advantages to the European Union, thereby bringing good things the member states. The European Union is an example of those sticks that could be harder to break down. The unities of those countries have strengthened their individual supports. Since the organization of the European Union was formed, it has become a great source of new development to the entire word in different areas. The European Union is not a weak sample of nations and during the years the European countries have worked together, the union has gotten stronger in several areas such as technology, economics and politics.

According to the book The European Union: A Policy of States and People Walter von Gerven points out some of the successes of the EU. These successes are “its establishment of a common integral or single market with economic freedoms, its external trade and competition policies, and its monetary union” (1). Also, the EU has been primarily founded by numerous treaties. Van Gerven writes that one of the treaties, by far the most important, is the one that established the European Economic Community (EEC, now EC), because it created “a common market of goods, persons, services, and capital subject to free competition and with a common commercial policy” (7). Therefore, each individual state imports, exports and trades together with 26 other members. That reinforces a common European market in which the member states decide together and finally they appear as a union which makes it more difficult from outside to break into in. Due to several treaties the EU has grown in many fields such as economically, politically, and technologically.

Before discussing the strength of the European Union, it will be defined. How is the “European Union” identified? The authors Simon Bulmer and Christian Lequesne are writing about Europeanization, a theoretical definition of the European Union, in the book The Member States of the European Union. The authors try to characterize Europeanization, but all theoretical definitions do not come close to the practical European Union and they all differ from each other. In theory, Europeanization means first of all, integration makes a state stronger and therefore, it puts the state in the center of Europeanization and secondly, the addition of a state builds politics in several different levels (11). In reality, the focus is the European Union in which every member is only a part of it. As a result, the national state itself neither symbolizes the basis for the European Union nor is there a connection between politics on national level and European level (11). This finally is what the European Union symbolizes: several member states are working together as a unit in order to achieve a goal which satisfies all members inside the union. However, decision making is difficult with twenty seven different opinions and therefore, laws and policies are compromises between the countries. Talking about the inside of the European Union one can say that decision making is connected with discussions. Even these discussions represent a talkative and self-contained union to the outside of the EU. Finally, exactly this makes a union strong; that it is sometimes undecided inside, but acts with firmness on international level.

The moment a country signs the contract to be a part of the European Union, it accepts several duties to be a member in order to receive benefits, so the state has an interest in a good political cooperation. One duty, for instance is that a member state must show participation in around about 300 working groups. These working groups occupy with certain issues such as atomic industry or consumer protection, but in very small groups and very small topics. The benefit of it is that interests of the particular country can be included by finding a solution. Also, every state has a national veto right, but in some circumstances it is only effective when the state can find other members for coalition to build a blocking minority. Therefore, a state cannot work by its own or against all others because this would cause isolation. In the book The Member States of the European Union, Hussein Kassim writes about the connection between the European Union and national government. Writing about policies and benefits he states,

The importance of �getting it right in Brussels’ to ensure that policy outcomes are favorable, avoid decision or rulings that are politically embarrassing, especially now that �Europe’ has become a salient domestic issue, . . . creates strong incentives for governments to establish effective coordination procedures to make sure that national interests are effectively represented. (291)

So, making an effort to get integrated avoids discontent concerns of member states. Being integrated means that any member state is completely included all parts and issues the European Union is discussing and deciding about. Besides that, the membership costs a lot of money because of the establishment of an administrative organization, according to Kassim (291). In that way, the interest is high in being involved into the whole political process of decision making. Concluding all that, a state gets benefits from working with other nations and as the result of team work, the European Union is functioning well.

Europe has gained strength, because it deals with so many social issues around the world such as the United Nations (UN). Mario TelÐ"Ñ-, author of the book Europe: A Civilian Power, came to that conclusion, because he compared the European Union to the United States in the way the government is built. The EU “is a kind of rationalized вЂ?mixed governmentвЂ™Ð²Ð‚Ñœ (211). He continues by saying that the presidency is divided into the Presidency of the European Council and the Presidency of the Commission which is different to the U.S. (211). Therefore, the strength of the EU underlies an upright harmonization that will profit from international relationships, TelÐ"Ñ- argues (212). One