European Union Agenda History & Overview of EU Case Study: United Kingdom and EU Case Study: Turkey and EU Future of EU Xiaoxi (Vicki) Li Ying Wang Siriwan Sukkasem
General Overview of EU A supranational and intergovernmental union of twenty-seven states Established in 1992 by the Treaty on European Union One of the largest economic and political entities in the world
History of Setup EU In May 1950-French Foreign Minister Robert Schuman presents his proposal of a united Europe – “Schuman declaration” In July 1952-The Treaty of Paris entered into force establishing the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC). In 1958-The Treaty of Paris entered into force establishing the European Economic Community, which later becomes the European Community (EC).
Criteria of Joining EU Copenhagen criteria: Stability of institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities. The existence of a functioning market economy as well as the capacity to cope with competitive pressure and market forces within the Union. The ability to take on the obligations of membership including adherence to the aims of political, economic and monetary union.
EU Enlargements 1952–58 –Belgium, France, Italy, Luxembourg, West Germany, Netherlands Enlargements: 1973 – First Enlargement: Denmark, Ireland, United Kingdom 1981 – Second "southern (part I)" Enlargement: Greece 1986 – Third "southern (part II)" Enlargement: Portugal, Spain 1995 - Fourth Enlargement: Austria, "northern (in part)": Finland, Sweden 2004 – Fifth "eastern (part I)" Enlargement: Czech republic, Cyprus, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia 2007 – Fifth "eastern (part II)" Enlargement: Bulgaria, Romania
EU Enlargements EU enlargements 1952–58 – founding members: Belgium, France, Italy, Luxembourg, West Germany, Netherlands
First Enlargement 1973 – First Enlargement: Denmark, Ireland, United Kingdom (*Greenland leaves 1985)
Second Enlargement 1981 – Second "southern (part I)" Enlargement: Greece
Third Enlargements 1986 – Third "southern (part II)" Enlargement: Portugal, Spain
Fourth Enlargements 1995 – Fourth Enlargement: "northern (in part)": Austria, Finland, Sweden
Fifth Enlargements 2004 – Fifth "eastern (part I)" Enlargement: Czech Republic, Cyprus, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia
Fifth Enlargements 2007 – Fifth "eastern (part II)" Enlargement: Bulgaria, Romania
Benefit of Joining EU POLITICAL BENEFITS: Increase the stability of democratic system Safety of the state No boundaries among all EU countries Easy traveling Free transfer of persons Tightening of the cultural bonds with the rest of Europe
Benefit of Joining EU ECONOMICAL BENEFITS: • Free transfer of goods • Freedom to provide services • Free transfer of capital • Unification of economical laws in all EU countries. • More competitive market and lowering the prices • Euro will be enforced
Benefit of Joining EU SOCIAL BENEFITS: Country will approach European standards: - Safety of its citizens - Job safety - Health - Education - Information - Higher quality of life
Benefit of Joining EU ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS: Country will implement European ecological norms -Improve the environment -Improve the quality of the life of our society The ecology-friendly technologies
UK’s actions before becoming a member • In the 1950’s, isolate from ECSC and opposite Europe Integration • In 1961, lodged the first application to EEC, but was rejected • In 1967, applied once again, was rejected, too • In 1969, applied to join for a third time • In 1973, finally joined EC.
Why? • WHY UK rejected the invitation of being a founding member in the beginning period of EU? • Why UK changed their minds to apply for EU? • Why its first and second applications were rejected by EU?
Economic and Political Reasons • Britain’s relations with the Commonwealth • Special relationship between UK and the U.S. • EU’s rapid development • The pressure from the U.S.
Relations with the Commonwealth In 1950’s: • Commonwealth played an important role in UK • European affairs were seen as irrelevant to the British Public • Membership would weaken Britain’s strong trading links to Commonwealth countries ( 50% of total exports)
Relations with the Commonwealth (Cont.) • After 1960: • Colonies became independent • Britain’s colony system was broken • Exports to Commonwealth decreased from 50% in 1951 to 39% in 1961 • Exports to EU countries increased from 25% to 30% in 1961 Conclusion: trading center’s changing make Britain put more emphasis on Europe
Special relationship with the U.S. • In the beginning, tried to become a super country depending on the US • 1946, $370Million financial support from the US • 1949, NATO was set up • British-American “Special Relationship” was changed after Suez Canal Case in 1956 Conclusion: Britain had no choice but to change to Europe for cooperation
EU’s rapid development • Three main reasons: • Britain’s political ties to the U.S. • Feel it beneath their Big Country’s dignity • Suspect the Europe Integration • Was astonished by the rapid development of ECSC’s setup • Tried to create a European free trade area to serve as a competing force, but failed • In 1959, created EFTA with seven other countries
EU’s gradually developing (Cont.) • Unequal competition (1960) • In addition, • Exports from “seven” to “six” was 24% of their total exports which is larger than their internal trading (19%) • Exports from Britain to “Seven” was only 11.9%, comparing 15.4% to “Six” Conclusion: The earning from “Seven” couldn’t cover its lost from “Six”, therefore Britain had to make choice between “Six” and “Seven”
The pressure from the U.S. • The US supports Europe Integration • The US suggested Britain to play leadership in EU • In 1945, Britain’s output of steel was 2/3 of the total amount of EU • Britain’s output of coal was equal the total output of coal in EU • US used the relationship to warn UK • Realization of the economic and political isolation and the trend of little influence in Europe Conclusion: Being afraid that the US would change to cooperate with the EU to substitute their special relationship, Britain had to join the EU.
Had no choice but to join… • Lodged the first unwilling application in 1961with certain terms: • Safeguarding of the Commonwealth • Guarantees of British agriculture • Guarantees of EFTA • Guarantees of the Length of the transition period before membership • Be vetoed by French President de Gaulle • UK was closer to US policies than European ones
Had no choice but to join…(Cont.) • In 1967, s second attempt was made, but was again rejected by a French veto Why????? • Feared that French hegemony in the EEC would be threatened
Finally joined…. Britain applied for a third time in 1969 after de Gaulle stepped down from power, finally it joined the community in 1973
After joined….. • Began a long period of conflict that would emerge between the original “six” and British preferences • Clearly had a different view of the Community than the rest of the partners. eg. EMU (Economic Monetary Union)
UK and Euroscepticism British eurosecpticism is against political and bureaucratic centralization while remaining in favor of other pan-European measures such as a free trade area. the centralized blocs is increasingly outdated in a world where globalization and localism are the main competing economic philosophies. Most of UK people have few cultural or social links with Europe
UK and Euroscepticism In recent years, a number of organizations, recent polls, press, and even the Commonwealth of Nations have promoted • the UK's leaving of the EU, either returning to the European free trade area or leaving the EU all together. • (some of them) closer links with Britain's former colonies and in the United States.
United Kingdom and Euro / European Monetary Union (EMU) Over view of UK economy • Lower of unfunded pensions • Income from overseas investment is greater than from Manufacturing export (80% of earnings from foreign investment derived from outside EU) • a system of variable-rate finance • a currency exchange market more closely to the US dollar than EU currency • a financial sector related to Wall Street and Tokyo, rather than Frankfurt
United Kingdom and Euro / European Monetary Union (EMU) The detrimental effect of Euro • cuts in public expenditure and/or increase in taxation to meet 3 % budget deficit (Maastricht convergence criteria) a loss of jobs, a fall in living standards • EU-wide monetary policy cannot meet individual national requirements • EMU affect fiscal policy by limited budgetary independence citizens lose the ability to influence democratically the measure determining living standard
United Kingdom and Euro / European Monetary Union (EMU) EMU is inappropriate for UK’s pattern of international trade UK refused to participate because preventing undesirable outcome Besides, The city of London, one of the three major world financial centers, could lose its pre-eminence over Frankfurt and Paris because Euro trading will be focused in The EMU area.
Case Study: Turkey and EU Turkey first applied for associate membership in the European Economic Community in 1959 It was officially recognized as a candidate for membership on December 12th, 1999 . Turkey started negotiations on October 3, 2005, a process that is likely to take at least a decade to complete.
Three main criteria of joining EU • Political: It must be a democracy with stable institutions that guarantee the rule of law, and must respect and protect human rights and minorities • Economic: It must be a functioning market economy and be able to cope with joining the single market • Legal: It must be able to comply with the obligations of EU membership, including the adoption of the body of EU law
Three main criteria and Turkey In its 17 December 2004 decision, the European Council recognized Turkey’s “significant legislative progress in many areas” but added that “these need to be further consolidated and broadened”. Furthermore, the report also took note of the improvements in the country’s economic stability and predictability and the strengthened independence and efficiency of the judiciary.”. Throughout Europe, the arguments that surround Turkey's projected accession revolve around a series of issues, ranging from demographic through geographic to political.
Arguments used FOR Turkish membership • Economic : very dynamic, rapidly modernizing economy. In 2004 and 2005, growth was above 7%, being far above average growth in the EU. In addition, Turkey has a young population which constitutes a major dynamism and a good opportunity for the EU. • NATO connection: Turkey is a staunch NATO ally. It would help counteract France's usually independent stance towards the United States. In France, Germany, or the Netherlands, this is seen as an argument against Turkish membership • Turkey is a strong regional military power which could give the EU more weight. • Energy Resources: within the last decade, the country has become a central hub of energy resources.
Arguments used FOR Turkish membership • Religious: EU can be called a "Christian club," and there are suspicions of allowing such a large Muslim country to join. However, the foundation of the European Union was never claimed to be on religious grounds • Demographics: Turkey's overwhelmingly Muslim population would lend considerable weight to EU multi-culturalism efforts and might help to prevent potential scenarios involving a clash of civilization • Political: The promise of EU membership, is considered by supporters to be a key incentive for deepening democracy in Turkey
Arguments used AGAINST Turkish membership • Differences in fundamental values and culture Turkey is currently the only candidate country with a Muslim majority. • The Turkish government's refusal to officially recognize the state of Cyprus (a current E.U. member State) • Only 3% of Turkey's territory lies in geographical Europe. Furthermore, the Turkish capital is not in Europe, but in Asia. Turkey's membership would mean that the European Union's external borders • Turkey's large size and poverty.
Arguments used AGAINST Turkish membership • Turkey's large political power once in the Union. Its almost 70 million inhabitants will bestow it the second largest number of representatives in the European Parliament, after Germany. • Constant political crisis (1960, 1971, 1980, 1997, 2007) in Turkey. A stabilized democracy is crucial for accession into the EU. • Many have continuing doubts on the commitment of the Turkish state to democracy and human rights, and its ability to reach European standards in these issues as gender equality, political freedom, religious freedom and minority rights
Effect on the future direction of the EU • With a different culture and poor economy, it might make it extremely difficult for the EU to deepen its integration, and might force it to be reduced to a simple zone of economic cooperation.. • Turkey is a traditionally Atlanticist and NATO country, with very close ties to the United States. Some member states, like France, wish the EU to increase its political independence from the United States and therefore believe Turkish membership is undesirable. • It would lead to demands for accession by Morocco, Morocco has already applied to join the EU and was rejected on geographic grounds (it lies in Africa).
Position of EU countries Germany: which will hold the EU Presidency from 1 January 2007, is critical of Turkish EU-membership. Germany wants to offer a “privileged partnership” instead of Turkish membership. Britain: remains committed to the EU's continued enlargement, and considers it a priority. Turkey is a significant trading partner of the UK. France, along with Austria: has pledged to hold a referendum on Turkey's EU accession, appears to become increasingly sceptical on the issue.. Newly-elected President Nicolas Sarkozy is firmly opposed to Turkish membership to the EU. He said that the European Union was not only an idea but also a geographical entity and ruled out Turkish membership.
Position of EU countries Greece: Turkey's traditional enemy, has by now practically become a cheerleader for EU membership. Poland: has been wary that Turkey, once accepted into the EU club, would draw massive subsidies and would also be way too big a country for the Union to swallow. Nevertheless, Warsaw has also repeatedly expressed full support for Turkey's EU membership bid. EU member states must unanimously agree to Turkishmembership for Turkish accession to be successful.
Constitution for Europe European integration is based on dual legitimacy, either by parliamentary vote or national referendum. In early 2005, French and Netherlands voters rejected the draft treaty establishing a constitution for Europe
Constitution for Europe The constitution Treaty is divided into four main parts I Institution Reform II Fundamental Rights III restated with more coherence and certain improvement IV general and final provision Only first part contained the institution reform. So, the convention had failed to produce a true constitution