European Letters

The speech given by Fischer on the 12th of May, as well as the one which was given by Chirac on the 27th of June, have brought the crucial issues related to the european unification process to the public opinion’s attention. Such issues can be divided into three chapters: I) The nature of the constituent process and its final stage, II) The general principles of the European Constitution, III) The institutions and the distrubution of competences.

The reason why the two speeches are revolutionary is beacause they clearly enunciate that the Union would inevitably break up, if we choose to enlarge it without a radical institutional reform; moreover, they indicate that this reform can only be implemented in within the framework of a small group of countries, starting from the original foundermembers States.

The Council has decided that the representatives of both the European institutions and the national Parliaments will work on a European Charter of fundamental rights. However, Europe doesn’t need an additional declaration, it needs to create a federal power which will allow for the realization of those rights instead by promoting the citizens dignity, security, and well-being.

The Union’s enlargement is unavoidable, but a 27 or 28 Member States Europe, with the current institutional framework would be come absolutely ungovernable if we don’t discard the intergovernmental method and then create a federal group.

The European unification process is facing an impasse and the final choice of a european federation will be the only way out of it. Yet, governments don’t want to give up the dogma of national sovereignty and the intergovernmental method. Moreover, proposals such as modifying article 48 and the majority vote will only serve the interest of pro-sovereignty movements.

The problem with the European Constitution isn’t just writing a new document, but founding a new power. In other words, it’s about founding a new federal and sovereign State in an environment which includes several sovereign States.

Although the discussion on the most important decisions takes place at a European level, interests are organized at a national level. This is due to the fact that we don’t have a real european government, we only have a Council made up by sovereign States whose main decisions are subject to no democratic control whatsoever, and they fall prey to the vetoes blackmail.

The key to solving the tragic Yugoslav incident is in Europe’s hands, provided that the Union’s national leaders understand that only by quickly creating a federal Union can they allow us to rapidly get out of a situation which brought once again war in he heart of Europe.

The Euopean Union is in need of an expansionary economic policy , and investments in european technological innovation and infrastructures. This can only be done through a federal Constitutions, and clearly not with the Union’s current financial resources that add up to the contradictory demands by the national governments.

All pro-europeans share the inability to acknowledge that if the Union is to overcome all the contradictions it is trapped into, it must make that revultionary leap forward and transfer sovereignty from national States to the federal States.

The challenge ahead is to develop an employment policy which will create jobs by generating actual wealth, instead of causing a waste of resources.

The EU could play a pivotal role in leading the reaction to finance’s excessive power, and lead to the establishment of a strong, responsible leadership, instead of taking us to protectionism. Of course, Europe as it is today cannot play such a role.