Problems.
With
many historical events it is sometimes difficult to establish the moment
when an event occurred. The original Treaty was not the commencement
of the Community.
Similarly who was responsible?
Schuman
& Sforza
The
architects of the Community were many, to some a dream, to some, for
example Schuman and Sforza concrete action lead to the Treaty.
Political harmony/integration are taken to mean the role of governmental
power.
Early
Attempts at integration.
In 1920
General Tukhacheveski in an order to his armies is quoted as encouraging
the Red Army to drive "through the heart of Poland to the conquest of
Europe and world conflagration".
The
Roman Emperors
The
Roman Emperors and Napoleon had attempted unification of Europe before
him.
Adolf
Hitler
Other
leaders have held dear the notion of a unified Europe, or a Europe
dominated by one nation state.
The
most recent being Adolf Hitler. His dream was a millennium of
German domination.
Modern
history.
WW2
It was
the devastation wreaked upon Europe during the second world war that can
be realistically seen as a starting point for the EEC.
The
futility of attempts at conquest and the need for interdependence of
nation states saw the introduction of the first Community and world
organisations.
European Steel and Coal Community
The
European Steel and Coal Community, the IMF and the World Bank, the Havana
Charter that lead to the General Agreement and Tariffs and Trade (GATT),
the UN Economic Commission for Europe. Later the Benelux Union.
Marshall Plan and the Council of Europe
Two
other events were even more focused on the concept of integrated Europe,
the Marshall Plan and the Council of Europe. All were intended to prevent
‘political’ struggles between nation states, and war.
Each of these organisations firmed the ground for the eventual European
Economic Community, but those responsible for each could not have been
said to be the original architect of the Community.
There
is no preceding world model
Napoleon quipped that ‘a constitution ought to be brief but ambiguous’, De
Gaulle spoke of Europe of States, Pompidou about a confederation
Thatcher about anti-federalism.
The
European Treaty of Maastricht unclear stating that the Union shall respect
the national identifies of its Member States’, vaguely identifying a
‘Europe of States’.
There
is no preceding world model.
The
Treaties.
The
Treaty of Rome 1957 (now the TEU)
The
political unification of Europe appeared premature in post-war days.
The
architects of the Community identified basic economic elements of
inter-state relations and constructed them into the three communities
(Coal and Steel, Euratom and EEC) - The Treaty of Rome 1957 (now the TEU).
The
objectives of the European Economic Community
The
objectives of the European Economic Community (EEC) are wider than the
objectives of the first two communities.
The EEC
is not a mere specialist organisation but an instrument of progressive
economic integration with a corresponding political potential. This
suggests that the EEC is by far the most important and may be regarded as
a prototype of an integrated European Community.
The idealism of the founder members was tempered by economic
practicalities.
The preamble to the EEC Treaty states that its signatories were
‘Determined to lay the foundations of ever closer union among the peoples
of Europe’. Resolved by thus pooling their resources to preserve and
strengthen peace and liberty’.
It would be pleasing for those signatories to note that the Court of
Justice has never lost sight of these aims when interpreting the Treaty
and legislation following it.
This is
much to the annoyance of, among others, Bill Cash the leading European
sceptic who believes the Court pays too much attention to the preambles of
the Treaties.
Political harmony and political integration?
The
preamble and the structure of the Treaty can be fruitlessly scoured for
reference to political harmony and political integration.
Notwithstanding, the thrust of the preamble, the Treaty and the protocols
all have as a leitmotiv; political harmony.
Role of EU
European Arrest Warrant
(EAW).
The founding fathers had peace on their minds, later politicians saw the
advancement of a trading block, and until recently the EU could be seen as
creating a "level playing field" in respect of trade and workers rights
(Pillars One and Two).
Under the Third Pillar EU states cooperate in criminal matters such as
drug trafficking, terrorism, human trafficking, racism and others.
In 2004 the EU's active role in criminal law saw the introduction of the
European Arrest Warrant (EAW).
From 1.1.04:
Lengthy extradition procedures have given way to the long awaited European
Arrest Warrant (EAW) for serious crimes, including terrorism throughout
the European Union. The EAW replaces court decisions in the country where
the person has been found, perhaps followed by appeals, sometimes lasting
years.
The EAW removes the risk of refusal by courts, which do not always
recognise the legal proceedings. The final decision, which until now has
been made by a politician, has been removed.
An European arrest warrant may be issued by a national court for an
offence carrying at least one year in prison or where the person sought
has been sentenced to at least four months.
Details
here (pdf file)
Conclusion
Subsidiarity has been a device together with margins of appreciation to
allow a real or pretence political role to remain with the nation states.
The issue of power in Europe is a continuing thorn in the side of
politicians.
The power of the High Authority of the ECSC was soon removed to the
Council and the Council of Ministers.
The issue of majority voting, the power of the ECJ and the Commission
continue to be raised as threats to sovereignty.
