European Union: A Critical Assessment

Photo Credit: https://www.psephizo.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/EU.jpg

Tupy (2016) critiqued the European Union’s (EU) claim of delivering peace, stability, and prosperity in Europe. He explained that the EU is not only failing to address Europe’s problems, it worsens them. Moreover, it’s incapable of serious reform even when faced with disintegration. 

Prior to affirming the author’s main arguments, it is useful to explain what the EU is. 

The EU is an evolving process known as European integration. It’s a culmination of a long economic and political integration process among European states aimed at delivering peace, stability, and prosperity in Europe. Its origins date back to 1951 when the European Coal and Steel Community was created. This was the first step towards a unified Europe. In 1957, it developed into the European Economic Community (ECC) that established a common market and a customs union with free movement of capital and labour between member nation states. The ECC became the European Community (EC) in 1967. The EC was formally transformed into the EU in 1993. Over time, governments have relinquished national sovereignty over a range of matters in favour of pooled sovereignty through a supranational entity (specifically created European institutions) that resembles a federal state and is governed by a byzantine bureaucracy in Brussels. 

The EU has successfully plodded through time but unless it desires reform; reality has proven its current model inapt in addressing today’s mushrooming problems. It has deviated away from its original aspirations. Through overregulation and centralisation, it has shaped a Europe that is worryingly unstable with a relatively slower economic growth to other regions. 

The EU and its precursors were not responsible for peace and stability in Europe. The critical role played by the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation established the foundation for peace prior to any form of pan-European institutions. The Yugoslavian crisis in the 1990s was resolved through American military intervention. Failed monetary and immigration policies combined with other self-inflicted wounds, created discord between member nation states that lead many Europeans to believe the EU is responsible for causing insecurity in Europe. 

“The EU institutions were, for the most part, ineffectual, and have increasingly become liabilities” (Tupy 2016, p. 2). European prosperity was recovering long before any idea of a united Europe. This rapid expansion stemmed from reconstruction and internal economic reforms. The ECC was not the catalyst for this growth but it became synonymous with Western Europe’s post-war economic prosperity.  

Overregulation of economic activity became rampant when the EU was officially activated in 1993. This gave the European institutions new powers to force an unending multitude of directives and regulations down the throats of EU countries. These decrees from Brussels continue to incite bitter complaints from many members. Increased centralisation of decision-making in Brussels saw a slowdown of Western European economic growth. These new powers not only weakened intra-European trade but also undermined EU’s global competitiveness against its peers. While the wealthiest EU economies have seen a decline in growth, the worse-off are not progressing at all. This is very disturbing considering Europe has also suffered from various self-inflicted wounds that go beyond overregulation. 

The growing centralisation of decision-making has created other problems. The byzantine bureaucracy in Brussels has stripped “the voters’ ability to effect policy changes through their elected representatives and to hold those representatives responsible in free and fair elections is rendered meaningless” (Tupy 2016, p. 4). Voting is useless because voters are further distanced from the real decisionmakers who are unelected, unknown, and unaccountable. “While the EU Commission and the EU Parliament grew in power and importance, the European peoples’ interest and participation in EU institutions steadily declined” (Tupy 2016, p. 5). Thus, the rise of populist parties in Europe was unintentionally driven by the EU. Many Europeans demonstrate their resentment of the democratic deficient and fight against the establishment by voting for populist parties. 

The article recognises the need for EU reforms as a way forward for European stability and prosperity. Tupy (2016) suggested that what European governments need to do is to reconnect with their increasingly restless electorates, rather than ignore the latter for the sake of the unwanted goal of European super state. “Many believe that such reform should include at least some repatriation of EU powers back to the nation states” (Tupy 2016, p. 5). The EU has outgrown its ability to effectively manage itself, therefore, raises the question of whether Brussels can manage its current size while still trying to grasp new powers? There is a probability of it collapsing which could be catastrophic for everyone.