Deepening of European integration versus widening of European integration
Essentially, as Nugent explains, the nature of European integration can be divided into two categories of the deepening of European integration process as ‘the extending of supranationalism and of policy competences’ and the widening of European integration process as ‘the bringing of new members’ (Nugent, 2003, 507).
In 1956, the Community faced a significant issue on its economic functions. The Suez episode became a turning point to reconsider the European organisation for further economic integration due to the cutting off of oil from Middle East. Hence, Wegs and Ladrech indicate that the Federalists expanded the ECSC into a common market which included all industrial and agricultural products (Wegs and Ladrech, 1996, 145) because the importance of coal and steel declined compared to other energy resources (Nugent, 2003, 38) such as oil and atomic energy. Therefore, the European Economic Community and European Atomic Energy Community were created through the signing of the Treaty of Rome in 1957. It was a further development to the economic unification. However, Urwin argues that one problem arose and that the creation of the EEC meant several institutions within Europe. Thus, as an effective solution, ECSC, ECC and Euratom were merged through the signing of the Treaty of Brussels in 1965 and created the European Community in order to make one single European Commission on European Council. It was the most considerable constitutional development since 1957 (Urwin, 1997, 107).
As a consequence of the successful economic growth of the EC countries, Western countries’ attitudes changed shortly and sought memberships for economic reason. Nugent mentions that Britain lost world power due to the shift of power to the USA and the USSR. In addition, the average economic function of the EC was far better than Britain between 1958 and 1969, where real earnings increased by 75 per cent and 38 per cent respectively (Nugent, 2003, 26). Consequently, Britain sought membership of the EC as well as Denmark and Ireland. Denmark and Ireland were not invited at the beginning of European integration, because the both countries’ industries based on agriculture and were regionally slightly far from Western Europe. However, they attempted to join the EC with Britain’s application and it was highly for the economic reason. Nicoll and Salmon claim that Denmark was greatly interested in the custom union and the Common Agricultural Policy. Ireland also sought to join the economic union along with a huge economic partner, Britain, and for the benefits from Common Agricultural Policy (Nicoll and Salmon, 2001, 435-437, 444). Although France vetoed their application twice, these countries finally gained membership in 1973. It was the first enlargement of the union from six to nine members.
In 1980s radical reform was required as an ineffective performance of a common market. MaCormich argues that the gap between a common market and practical operations was wide. In the mid-1970s, the EC member states tended to protect their national markets rather than build an European market. Moreover, the solution was urgently needed for the effective common market due to the decline of European economy in 1980s (MaCormich, 1999, 176). Therefore, in 1986 the Single European Act established for a further development on the common market. Dinan mentions ‘The Single European Act was the first major treaty change in the EC’s history.’ In addition, member states would cooperate more closely on the political and economic aspects of security (Dinan, 2005, 108).
In addition, during the 1980s, three more states gained membership; Greece in 1981 and Portugal and Spain in 1986. It was a complicated decision to accept them, because as indicated by Gowland, Greece, Spain and Portugal were governed by authoritarian regimes until the mid-1970s and were economically undeveloped (Gowland et al, 2000, 166). However, their applications were successful mainly for political reasons. Nugent argues that the joining of new state would bring political stability in southern Europe and promote political and economic aspects of the Community (Nugent, 2003, 30). In addition, Pinder and Usherwood claim that the Community wanted these new member states for its projects on the Single European Act (Pinder and Usherwood, 2007, 27). Consequently, these states gained membership for political integration with economic elements.
Deepening of European integration in relation to widening of the European integration
A few years later, the sudden collapse of communism in Eastern Europe marked the most considerable point in the European integration history. It meant the end of the Cold War, which meant the disappearance of the Soviet treat, and brought the whole continent together. Wegs and Ladrech argue that it was a great opportunity to promote political integration as a result of Germany unification (Wegs and Ladrech, 1996, 154). In addition, as a demand of further effective single market, Economic and Monetary Union was advocated under the political element (Bomberg, 2008, 36). Consequently, the Maastricht Treaty, which created the European Union, was signed in 1991. As it is stated by George and Bache, it based on three pillars which is in the table 1.2 (George and Bache, 2001, 124). It was the most significant turning point of European integration. In addition, the first accession, after the creation of the European Union, was smooth. Dinan mentions that Austria, Finland and Sweden’s economies were better than existing EU member states and it was predicted that the accession of Sweden and Finland would strengthen the traditional democracy (Dinan, 2005, 135, 141-142)
In practice, the most significant issue of the EU was the enlargement of the Central and Eastern European countries and the problem of the Balkan States as a consequence of the collapse of communism in Europe. Although, the major threat of the Soviet Union had disappeared, the security issue arose and it was a more serious problem than the period of Cold War due to instability and disintegration of Central and East Europe and the Balkan States. Sakwa and Stevens argue that the relation of Europe was more fragmented, problematic and uncertain than the period of the Cold War, due to the ethnic and territorial conflicts in the Balkan States (Sakwa and Stevens, 2000, 138). In addition, Central and East European countries attempted to return to Europe to escape from communism through the joining of the EU. According to Dinan, Central and Eastern European countries sought membership not only for financial support, market access and technical assistance but also for recognition of their ‘Europeanness’. Moreover, in the view of the EU, it was a significant opportunity and responsibility to enhance the economy and democracy of Eastern Europe and also promote the stability and security of Europe and pan-European integration (Dinan, 2005, 143). The integration of Central and Eastern European countries was very significant to maintaining and enhancing the security in Europe. However, it was a controversial problem to accept a large number of applicants which would double the number of EU members. Thus, in 1993, the EU set the Copenhagen Criteria which contained conditions to joining the EU.
Table 1.1
Source: Neill Nugent (2003) The Government and Politics of the European Union, 495
Moreover, according to Pinder and Usherwood, federalists felt the Maastricht Treaty was not suffice for single monetary and further enlargement (Pinder and Usherwood, 2007, 31).Therefore, as MaCormich argues, the Treaty of Amsterdam signed to set revisions for political union to accompany the economic and monetary union and changed the structure of the Union in order to accept anticipating new members (MaCormich, 1999, 83). However, despite of the Treaty of Amsterdam, the preparation of enlargement was not successful. Beach argues that institutional reform was required in order to accept a huge enlargement (Beach, 2005, 146). Therefore the IGC opened Nice European Council in February 2000. As a result of the Treaty of Nice, ten new members acceded to the EU in 2004 and Bulgaria and Romania joined in 2007. Nugent argues that since the mid 1980s, widening of integration promoted deepening policy and also the deepening of integration policies was preparation for potential widening of integration (Nugent, 2003, 507-508). It has promoted political stability and security of Europe and also expanded European market which strengthens European economy in the world.
Table 1.2
The European Union: after the Treaty of Maastricht
The European Union: after the Treaty of Amsterdam
Source: Gowland, et al, The European Mosaic; Contemporary Politics, Economics & Culture, 77
Table 1.3 Deepening process of the European integration
Source: Pinder and Usherwood, The European Union; A very Short Introduction, 178-185
Table 1.4 Impact of enlargement
Source: Michelle Cini, European Union Politics, 425
Conclusion
As it is mentioned above, the first reasons for European integration were to bring security and economic development and economic growth focused by 1980s. It became a foundation for a further political union. In addition, as a consequence of the collapse of communism, for the EU, it was a great opportunity and responsibility to integrate the whole continent to maintain settlement of security. Consequently, the European integration has changed for economic, political and security reasons and each element has a cohesion in the process of European integration. Economic integration was for further political integration. In addition, the security in Europe has promoted the economic and political functions of the EU. From 6 members to 27 members, the EU has had a various reforms and institutional changes, but it is in doubt whether the EU will be willing to accept more applications, such as from non-EU Western European countries, the Balkan States and Turkey. In addition, social issues such as immigration, crime, wealth and European citizenship have been more emphasised recently and it will more affect on European integration in the future. Essentially, European integration will be more varied and complex than it has progressed and achieved over time.
Bibliography
Brent F. Nelsen and Alexander Stubb., ed (2003) The European Union; Readings on the Theory and Practice of European Integration (3rd edition), Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan
Michelle Cini (2007) European Union Politics (2nd edition), Oxford, Oxford University Press
David Gowland et al (2000) The European Mosaic; Contemporary Politics, Economics & Culture, Essex, Longman
Derek Beach (2005) The Dynamics of European Integration; Why and When EU institutions matter, Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan
Derek W. Urwin (1997) A Political History of Western Europe Since 1945 (5th edition), London, Longman
Desmond Dinan (2005) Ever Close Union; An Introduction to European Integration
(3rd edition), Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan
Elizabeth Bomberg, John Peterson and Alexander Stubb (2008) The European Union: How Does it Work? (2nd edition), Oxford, Oxford University Press
John MaCormich (1999) Understanding the European Union; A Concise Introduction, Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan
John Pinder and Simon Usherwood (2007) The European Union, A Very Short Introduction (Fully Updated New Edition), Oxford, Oxford University Press
John W. Young (1991) Cold War Europe 1945-1989; A political history, New York, Chapman and Hall
J. Robert Wegs and Robert Ladrech (1996) Europe Since 1945; A Concise History
(4th edition), Boston, Macmillan Press
Neill Nugent (2003) The Government and Politics of the European Union (5th edition), Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan
Richard Sakwa and Anne Stevens (2000) Contemporary Europe, London, Macmillan Press
Stephen George and Ian Bache (2001) Politics in the European Union, Oxford,
Oxford University Press
William Nicoll and Trevor C. Salmon (2001) Understanding the European Union, Essex, Longman
