EU hits Half Century

Even as the EU grapples with tough realities in Europe and the world, its 50th anniversary summit at Berlin was both a time for celebration and reflection

Rajendra Abhyankar Luxembourg

The European Union (EU) celebrated its 50th Anniversary at its summit in Berlin under the German Presidency in the last weekend of March. It stands as a solid economic bloc of 450 million people committed to democracy, secularism and a force in the global economy. Its major role in the WTO-Doha Round negotiations could determine the success of those long-delayed negotiations. Most importantly, the EU has been able to create a foreign policy niche for itself by focusing on the "softer" areas like promotion of human rights, democracy and the rule of law around the world.

In these five decades the very character of the European entity has changed dramatically. From the original six members it now has 27 with Turkey still at the door. The experiment is still the most successful where age-old enmities were laid to rest forever. It still remains a model for other troubled spots round the world. Although the European community did not have a military dimension, it was understood that North Atlantic Treaty Organisation[NATO],(which included countries which were then non-members) would perform that role in the Cold War. Through the years of the Cold War, the EEC (European Economic Community) and NATO together kept the erstwhile Soviet Union’s westward expansion at bay while at the same time harbouring its ambition to integrate Eastern Europe within its fold. The collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War saw a burgeoning of new states in Europe, all of them eager to join the larger entity. At Berlin, a reunified Germany becomes the vanguard of the EU for the next half century.

The record of the EU so far has been mixed. If its expansion to cover the eastern European nations — implying their joining the community of democratic nations — has been beneficial to the peoples of those countries, the rapid increase of members at varying stages of economic prosperity has exacerbated internal tension on subsidies, unification of markets, single currency and labour mobility. If expansion has promoted diversity, it has also brought in train doubts on the best way to deal with religious and ethnic differences. If the EU perceives itself to be more secure, it still has to effectively the consequences of that difference.

Similarly, while NATO, bereft of its original mission, has assumed a role in out-of-area operations, the EU has moved ahead with developing its own nuclear, military and space dimensions. While economic integration within has generally moved successfully, it has created new disparities which have no solution.

These contradictions had a crucial role in the rejection of the EU’s draft Constitution by France and the Netherlands in 2005, putting paid to Europe’s ambition to become a single entity de jure. Although the Berlin Declaration will express the desire of the member states to chart a way forward on this important issue, the current political leadership crisis does not hold out much hope for an early resolution. We will probably hear high-sounding words on this issue but little by way of a practical way forward.

The issue of expansion is another factor which will be papered over at Berlin. The question of Turkey’s entry will loom large with France and Austria opposed to it and an ambivalent attitude on the part of some others. The prospect of including a large Muslim majority country into the councils of power of a religiously homogenous grouping still appears daunting to many. In retrospect it looks like Europe moved too fast without having settled fundamental issues like the limits of national sovereignty, competence and an agreement on how this massive edifice was going forward dynamically. The increase by 10 new members in 2005 brought out the EU’s internal contradictions with the division between ‘old’ and ‘new’ Europe, which were so starkly reflected in the divisions in the European Council on support to the US invasion of Iraq.

This has been reflected in other areas also, which affect the day-to-day lives of the man-in-the street. It was obvious that the practice of consensus decision-making would have to be given up. An ingenuous system of ‘qualified majority’ giving weightage to population was devised to ensure that the smaller members do not suffer at the hands of the more powerful. Today, decisions made in Brussels affect between 30 to 70 per cent of the lives of the common individual depending on his country’s commitment to the EU.

It is the smaller countries which have the largest stake in becoming part of the supra-national entity. The more powerful like the UK, France, Britain, Spain and Germany are still loath to surrender their sovereignty and many crucial areas remain in the ‘national competence’. This has hobbled the EU’s plans, particularly in dealing with issues like migration, protection of minorities and harmonisation of trade and investment regulations and labour reform. Similarly, the fact that not all the EU members are part of the Euro-zone, the others have been equally saddled with the downside of a heavy currency reducing competitiveness of European industry as a whole. In consequence, the resurgence on nationalist sentiments within the EU does not augur well for the near future.

The Berlin Summit will address these worrying trends within Europe with a view to seeking solutions to enhance and strengthen the concept of Europe’s ‘soft power’ in the world. The entire international community has a stake in seeking a Europe that can play a balancing political, strategic and economic role in a world dominated by a single superpower. The rise of Europe after the end of the Cold War introduced a new dynamism into an old idea. Yet somewhere along the way, Europe lost its focus with the growth pangs of a changing world order. We hope that the Berlin Declaration will rejuvenate the European ambition.

India’s formal relationship with the EU was forced upon it due to the UK’s accession to the EEC in 1973. From carving out a Commercial Cooperation Agreement to take care of the resultant trade loss in the last 30 years, we have become the EU’s ‘strategic partner’ — only one of six. India’s rising economic resurgence led the EU in 2004 to invite us to upgrade the relationship. Yet while its strategic partnerships with US, Russia, Japan, China and Canada only cemented existing dynamics, in India’s case the strategic nature of the relationship is predicated on potential and not ground realities. It is up to the two sides to now create those realities. It is still a work in progress.

The record is mixed but on the whole, positive. The EU is our largest trading partner and largest investor. There has been success in concluding agreements on Galileo satellite navigation system, in counter-terrorism cooperation, better access for our traditional exports and an easier access for two-way investments yet we still face difficulties in securing a level playing field for our professionals and in non-discriminatory treatment as much for our agricultural exports as for our investments in the EU. We still have to successfully tackle the EU members of the Nuclear Suppliers Group who have a veto on the India-US deal. While we are embarked on exploring the possibility of an FTA type agreement with the EU, resistance from European industry and trade remains a concern.

The EU will remain a major player in the world. Its strength stems from its ‘soft power’ whose parameters it continues to define in a complex and changing world. Although it has powerful members — with two of the P-5 — we see a reinforcing role between the EU and its member-states. The EU’s positions on multi-polarity in international relations, encouragement to democracy and pluralism and a freer international trading environment assure a degree of stability in the world today. India and the EU share a common commitment to these ideals. Our strategic relationship will have to be built on these foundations.