The European Union is the least sexy iternational institution on the planet. The African Union is inefficient and excels mostly on defending ruthless dictators still seen as anticolonial heroes. But many African look up to it as an 'African' institution. The United Nations are an inefficient moloch that usually decide to postpone their judgement or action. And when they take action, they try to make it resemble inaction as closely as possible. International organisations without strong enforcement mechanisms or a streamlined decision-making process are doomed not to steal the show on the international level. That is why the United States decided to strengthen the federal level considerably about a decade after independence. It was an unworkable conglomerate without.
The European Union suffers from these two deficits, yet they are not its only problems. The main story EU citizens are told about the institution is a sad one, told by politicians from the national level: 'We had to.' This is the main reason for its impopularity among many. The EU has become the scapegoat national politicians can refer to when they have to push through unpopular decisions. A useful mechanism on the national level, maybe. But the credibility of the organisation suffers under it tremendously. The austerity programs being pushed through under the auspices of the EU are set to decrease its popularity even further.
Yet it could have been comepletely different. Very useful legislation has been passed on a European scale, especially concerning consumer protection. Lawsuits against molochs business that many smaller companies would not be able to wage: Google, Microsoft, ... International cooperation under the flags of the ESA and EADS, both highly successfull, but not highlighted nearly enough. Roaming and international calling charges within the EU have been lowered tremendously. But does the average European citizen have even the slightest clue how this came to be? Cellphone companies were left to steal the show, advertising their new 'ultracheap international rates', which they only assumed under the enforcement of European law. The Erasmus Europe-wide exchange programme is a very successful and popular measure. But only few students that go on these programmes give any credit the European Union.
Many problems haunt the EU: a democratic deficit, 'invisible' leadership, rogue national politicans that undercut European decision-making, the blame game played on a national level pointing towards the EU, the single currency without a pan-European economic or fiscal approach and others. But the least the EU should do is seize some of the credit for all the good things they undertake. The relation between the institution and its citizens is rotten. And Europeans should not be expected to come crawl back to the EU to make amends any time soon.
But apart from this 'advertising issue' there are deeper problems with the structural model of the EU. The aloof and opaque decision-making process and the bureaucratic mindset of officials involved is not helping anyone. If the European Union wants to outgrow its status of overarching bully, disliked by its citizens, if it wants politicians on the national level to stop demonizing it while they have to sell it to their citizens at the same time, things will have to change sooner rather than later. The 'presidency of the European Council' is too vague and destined for what appears only as more 'shady backroom dealings'. More is needed: direct elections for European politicians who can make real decisions; faces that represent the citizens of the Union, not just their politicians.
No comments:
Post a Comment