ENLARGEMENT–HOW WILL IT AFFECT THE EUROPEAN UNION AND THE
TRANSATLANTIC RELATIONSHIP?
Gérard Depayre
Deputy Head of the Delegation of the European Commission to the United States
of America
Columbia University
in the City of New York
7th April, 2003
Keynote Address
Law and Governance
in an Enlarged Europe Conference
1) Introduction
Ladies and Gentlemen,
It is
a pleasure to speak to such a distinguished audience of scholars and experts
– and a danger of course, as for every single specific aspect of
enlargement there is certainly someone in this room who knows far more
about it than I. Fortunately for me, I’ve been asked to speak in the
evening, at dinner, after you have already lived through half a day of very
detailed presentations on legal and regulatory implications of enlargement.
And, as it is difficult to enjoy a well-deserved meal and agreeable company
whilst at the same time having to listen to a speech, I have resolved
a) to keep my
remarks reasonably short, all things being relative;
b) to leave the
realm of scholarly knowledge and simply throw out a number of thoughts on the
political significance of enlargement for Europe and for the
relationship between the United States and Europe.
2) The fundamental
significance of enlargement
Enlargement is more than anything else the end of what historians may one
day call the century of inter-European strife and separation. In 1914, when
Europe was still the undisputed center of the world, Sir Edward Grey, the
British Foreign Secretary, remarked as the war broke out:
“The lights are going out all over Europe and I doubt we will see them
go on again in our lifetime.”
He was right. Indeed, they did not go back on for all Europeans until 1989.
It was only after two world wars, after the brutality of Nazism, the horrors of
genocide, the temporary success of totalitarian regimes, after the harsh divide
of the Iron Curtain, that Europe at last saw the lights go on for all its peoples
again. Enlargement is the transformation of that moment into a stable European
political order.
All
difficulties of making it work – and there are difficulties – should not
obscure the fundamental fact that enlargement is an extraordinary second
chance for a continent that had almost self-destructed and whose eastern
half had paid an especially heavy price.
Enlargement is, thus, above all, a reason for great satisfaction. If enlargement
were in doubt, Europe would be in doubt. After the end of the cruel and artificial
division of the continent, any attempt to erect new barriers and to divide Europe
into political and economic haves and political and economic have-nots would have
been a tragic mistake. The mistake was not made, and on the 1 May 2004 Europe
is set to celebrate the confirmation of what took place in 1989. It will truly
be a Europe whole and free.
3) The transformation of the European Union
This
is not to say that enlargement will be a cake-walk. Enlargement is
definitely not only a great opportunity but also a great challenge that has
and will require tough slugging.
It is
not easy to join societies together that have lived separately for almost
fifty years. Let us not belittle that fact. The Union is no coalition of
states, is no international organisation – it is and remains first and
foremost a “joint society,” a genuine community where the common frame of
European law and regulations, adopted by the members in Brussels, binds our
countries in ways that directly affect the daily lives of our citizens down
to sometimes very mundane details.
The
more obscure of EC regulations regularly give rise to satirical comments,
sometimes understandably so. But on the other hand: it is perhaps easier to
share a great political vision than to agree on the nitty-gritty. On common
standards for environmental protection or the safety of children’s toys, on
rules regarding accounting and the like. The mundane is a big part of our
life, it is a big part of political life, and it is a big part of the
European integration. As anyone who is or has ever been married knows, it is
the ultimate test of the desire to live together. And our quality of life
has more to do with taking care of the mundane, in a good and fair way, than
many acknowledge.
The
new members have made incredible progress over the past decade in bringing
up their laws and regulations to the level of modern European governance – a
feat which is perhaps not always justly recognised. There was no textbook
for such a transformation of societies under communist dictatorship into
modern democracies with the trappings of the rule of law and
service-oriented administrations. It has been a difficult process at times,
with governments forced to make difficult choices – and I believe it is not
presumptuous to say that, without the “reward” of EU membership, this effort
could have been politically much more difficult to push through.
And
honesty requires me to say that we’re not entirely there yet either. The
process is not yet completed, as amazing as the achievements are. In several
of the accession countries, administrative and judicial structures need to
be further reformed and strengthened. There are those where corruption is
still an issue. Industrial restructuring has by no means been completed in
all of them. This is also true for agriculture. Over time, the problems of
the new countries will become comparable to those of the current members,
and in some areas the new members are already ahead: the electricity market
in Slovakia is more open than in France; private ownership of the banking
sector in stronger in Estonia than in Germany.
Nonetheless, when looking at the task of actually implementing and enforcing
the “acquis communautaire,” a rule-book basically written by wealthy
states, we need to keep in mind what incredible performance we are asking of
new members whose average GDP per capita is roughly 40% of the average of
the present Union. I am confident that, given the proper support, it can be
done. For it is do-able: remember Ireland which joined as the poorest
member in a smaller Union, at just 60% of the average GDP per capita, and
which today, 30 years later, is second only to Luxembourg. Societies, like
individuals, can rise to the challenges demanded of them.
The enlarged Union must also rise to a political challenge. Because, beyond
the task of ensuring the coherence of the Community pillar in the enlarged Union,
there is also the even more daunting task of making sure that the overall structure
remains workable and that an EU with 25 members does not end in permanent immobility.
In this respect, the
Convention chaired by former French President Giscard d’Estaing has its work
cut out for it. There will be, I am confident, some form of constitution and a
clarification of responsibilities in the Union. We know what we need – a constitutional
arrangement that strikes the right balance between efficiency and legitimacy,
the two key elements of successful political order. This is all the more necessary
in a larger Union with even greater diversity. Easier said than done, of course
– as the famous Polish writer S. Lec (pronounced Lem) wrote: Liberté, égalité,
fraternité, of course – but how do we get down to the verbs? Today, at any rate,
it is too early to zero in on specific arrangements. What I’ll propose instead
to do is to give you my entirely personal view of how the enlarged Union will
work.
In a
nutshell: I believe the larger EU will reach out, consolidate and intensify.
1) It
will reach out to its eastern and southern neighbors whose membership
is either not at all envisageable or at best very far off by offering to
extend the internal market rules and privileges, perhaps with restrictions
on movement of persons. These neighbors would thus be part of an extended
great single market.
2) In
the enlarged EU itself the current acquis will be consolidated
in the economic and regulatory sphere, including competition, environment,
energy and transport to name but a few areas. The EU will push forward with
macro-economic co-governance, where a special relationship between
EURO members may solidify.
3) Building on
this solid base, some countries will want to move faster and farther, taking a
more political approach. I personally do not expect – nor hope for – a very institutional
approach, where a fixed group would declare itself to be the avant-garde. I think
you’re more likely to see a number of concrete actions being proposed by what
often will be the same crowd, with varying numbers of other countries going along
depending on the topic. This mechanism of “reinforced cooperation” in foreign
policy matters for instance is already foreseen in the Treaty – in the future,
I believe it will be used.
This is my scenario for the medium term. And the longer term? Not all, as Keynes
famously said, but many of us will be dead by then. So I refuse to peek into the
crystal ball. The definite shape of Europeis for the generation of my grandchildren
to sort out. The foundations are there. Our task is to solidify them.
4) The EU-US
relationship
Let me
now close my presentation with two thoughts on the EU-US relationship, which
has usually closely mirrored in the past the evolution of the EC and then
the EU. An enlarged Union will be, in my view, by sheer size and potential,
an even more important partner for the US than today.
First of all, the current political environment should not lead us to make
a reverse version of the mistake of the ‘90s, where many considered that only
economics mattered and politics and government were becoming irrelevant. Let us
not today simply turn the tables and consider that, because politics and strategic
issues dominate the news and sometimes our bad dreams, that economic issues have
suddenly become secondary. That is mere appearance, pure illusion. Economics matter
greatly. And the new Union, with 460 million citizens and consumers, will be a
huge opportunity for US business, just as the Internal Market proved to be not
some form of “Fortress Europe” as many had feared, but a huge opportunity for
the United States.
Secondly, the intra-EU divisions on
Iraq and the differences – undoubtedly hard feelings as well – between
some member states’ governments and the US Administration should not lead us
to believe the exciting and fashionable editorials predicting ever-deeper
transatlantic rifts until our alliance collapses. I believe that the truth
is far more boring. The truism that, when the US and Europe work together,
much can be achieved and that divisions between them ultimately weaken both
sides still holds true, as unexciting as such truisms may be.
The US has ultimately little to gain from a 19th century-type Europe
and the instability that it would create. Some may see the short-term advantages
in a “divide and rule” approach, where the more powerful US would find it easier
to get its way. Short-term advantages of course exist, and using power to dominate
is in human nature. But those who truly believe that such a course would be beneficial
to the US are, in my view, not so much hard-nosed realists but simply shortsighted
people. Why? Because in tomorrow’s world, a united Europe that would be
fundamentally at odds with the US is in fact one of the most unlikely political
scenarios to imagine.
A more
integrated Europe may talk back even more than it does today; it might
occasionally offer alternative strategies and be even tougher in defending
core interests. But there is no reason to believe that a United
Europe would be so foolish as to think that a fundamentally adversarial
relationship to the US is to its benefit. We are living in a world where
other, non-Western powers are rising, reclaiming their right to equality
after a long eclipse in terms of international power – think of China, think
of India. And that is only fair and thus a good thing. But it will change
the world.
Today,
where ultimately only the US and, to a lesser extent, the European powers
and Russia are strong international actors, it may sometimes appear that
much divides us. Because we, or primarily the US, set the agenda – we are
squabbling among ourselves, so to speak. The day the world becomes more
multifaceted – and that day is not long off, it is being prepared, everyone
who is willing to look can see it coming – it will be evident that the US
and Europe share a common bond equal to no other, economically and
politically. A stronger Europe – not a weaker US – would ensure that this
relationship endures, a relationship of equals built on respect and a shared
vision for the future. Allow me to speak for a moment like an American and
simply say: We can do it.
Thank
you very much for your attention.
