European Union: Final Exam

Allison Brown European Union Dr. Anderson May 12, 2021 Final Exam I.D. Questions: 1.) European Monetary Union (EMU) This union was created as a result of the Maastricht Treaty in 1992 and further integrated members of the European Union and the continent. Most noteworthy, the euro currency’s implementation, many states adopted the new currency while some, like Sweden, chose to remain with their own currency. The EMU is important because it further integrations Europe while economically pursuing higher joint goals. 2.) Populism Populism is a political ideology or dialogue that seeks to separate government from the people, making average citizens feel as though their needs and concerns are unmet by the “elite” of society and those who govern. This is relevant to Europe because of the rise and popularity of populist leaders like Marine Le Pen in France and the Five-Star Movement in Italy, these groups often play off of fears of refugee populations and discredit the European Union as being a useless bureaucratic tool. 3.) Single Market The European Single market allows for the European Union to be recognized as a single territory without any internal borders or regulations that could prohibit trade. The single market allows for the European Union to raise quality of products through strict regulations, increase market competition, and make supply chains throughout the continent. The single market is important to the European Union because of the trade efficiency it creates for the region as well as the relative power it grants on the world stage as a trade power. 4.) Eurobarometer Established in 1973, the Eurobarometer has conducted surveys to average European citizens about their views on the European Union and the future of European integration. In 2007, the European Parliament launched their own surveys that specifically questioned citizens’ “perceptions and expectations” for the European Union in the future. The Eurobarometer is important because it is a tool to see the processes of European integration and how the public views the European Union and the role it plays in the future. 5.) Democratic deficit This phrase was coined to explain the perceived, by some, deficit between the European Union’s decision-making bodies and average European citizens. Due to the inherently complex governing bodies and the often under looked elections of European politicians, there can be a discontent from the European Union. This is important because public perception and views of the European Union are crucial to the governing body remaining in power in Europe and the integration of Europe, which arguably remains crucial to the prevention of large scale conflict between member states. 6.) Schengen Accords This Accord defined the region and access of European people to move freely throughout the region in the European Union and outside in the “Schengen Zone”. All have open borders for free trade and movement as well as a common visa policy. The agreement in 1985, was signed in Schengen, Luxembourg. Schengen is important because it allows for Europeans to freely travel and work across Europe, furthering integration. 7.) ECB Or the European Central Bank, is the sole central bank of the Eurozone, the phrase for the monetary union composed of 19 EU member states who use the euro as their national currency. The Treaty of Amsterdam established the bank in 1998 and the ECB today is one of the most important central banks globally, and it’s stock is owned by all the different 27 central banks of each EU member state. The bank monitors tariffs and the euro’s economic viability and is important because it ensures the economies of Europe can work integrated through the euro currency. 8.) NATO Or the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, was formed in 1949 following the end of World War II. NATO includes both the United States and Canada as well as numerous European states to safeguard the freedom and security of its members through military means. NATO has no automatic trigger, due to the fear of the United States engaging too-quickly in nuclear combat, if Article 5 is invoked by a member nation being attacked, there is a meeting with voting discussion before retaliatory measures are taken. The United States has taken a leadership role in NATO and the organization is important to Europe because it ensures military security because of Article 5 and joint militaries, proving the European Union with hard power. 9.) Dublin Regulation This regulation is a European Union law that determines each member state of the European Union is responsible to submit people seeking international refuge under the Geneva Convention and the European Union’s Qualification Directive. The Dublin Regulation itself establishes a continent wide finger-printing system for unauthorized migrants seeking asylum in Europe and the Dublin Regulation also works to find which European signatories are responsible for asylum claims and transfer migrants. The Dublin Regulation is important to the European Union because it establishes protocol for refugee populations moving between European member states and has been crucial in addressing the European “refugee crisis”. 10.) European Council The European Council refers to the meetings of all the EU’s heads of state and government to set political objectives and interests in the Union, the council also sets the agenda and presides over meetings as well as representing the EU in other European countries and on the world stage. The European Council is important because it establishes the EU’s commission president as well as the political guidelines and goals for the EU in that period. Essay Questions: 1. Based on your experience in the simulation, the lectures and readings, which integration theory do you think best describes, explains, and predicts the development of European integration and why? In doing so, be sure to list all the main theories of European integration (see the lectures, Ginsberg, p. 64, and the Pollack article) and to explain each one and why you think it’s inferior to the one you’ve chosen. Why is the one you’ve chosen better? Many different notions and theories exist in EU integration academia surrounding policies and institutions, the field is constantly changing and different approaches can work to predict the future of the EU and the role both state and non-state actors will play in that future. There are three different approaches to study EU integration, policies, and institutions. Each approach differs with regards to applying international relations theory vs. comparative political theories and the debate over what role non-state actors play in the European Union’s future. Through our simulation of the 1991/1992 Maastricht Treaty, the role these theories play becomes clear alongside their differing opinions to explain and expand European integration. However, the integration theory that best explains European integration is Intergovernmentalism. Intergovernmentalism, reformed by Andrew Moravcsik (1993, 1998), intergovernmentalism places states as the primary actors in the integration process, not non-state actors. Moravcsisk’s take, liberal intergovernmentalism in European integration combines a “liberal theory of national preference formation with an intergovernmental model of EU-level bargaining and a model of institutional choice” (Pollack 360). Intervgovernmentalism consists of three main components assuming rational state behavior to promote negotiations with different actors. In the simulation, it was clear that “governments pursued national interests that drive integration processes” (Ginsberg 64). Each state in the simulation had their own pursuits, and those desires in negotiations is what drove the process for further integration. Individual interests led to debate and eventually the succession of some individual desires to obtain others, further integrating in the process. Another compelling argument of intergovernmentalism in integration processes that was showcased in our simulation is the lack of development in this theory for CFSP, “...integration continues in functional areas, but states retain sovereignty in foreign policy and defense” (Ginsberg 64). With our simulation and the actual Maastricht Treaty negotiations, and even in European Union history in general, making treaties and integrating economically and politically is more common than the creation of a CFSP. In contrast, functionalism/neofunctionalism, is defined as a theory of regional integration which downplays globalization and reintroduces territory into its governance, similar to some thoughts of Jean Monnet on European integration. Pollack argues that neo-functionalism in the EU has created a process of “functional spillover” (Pollack 359) that creates pressure to extend the authority of institutions and in the broader region in order to change currency exchange rates, taxation, and wages. Essentially, the EU and other groups create additional pressure for further integration to better the supranational system. With this theory, the “habits of cooperation among states will spur spillover of cooperation into new/related areas” (Ginsberg 64). Although habits of cooperation were evident in our negotiations during the simulation, state’s own values guided the discussion and more often than not the conversation over our values still guided the diplomatic conversation more than the active want to cooperate with one another as individual member states with our own interests. A shortcoming of this theory is also that, “it fails to anticipate staying power of national interests in the European Commision’s decision making after the French empty chair crisis … underemphasized the important of interstate bargaining/trade-offs that impact integration.” (Ginsberg 64). 2. Based on the lectures, the readings and the film Auberge Espagnole, is creating a European identity possible? In answering this question, be sure to explain about public opinion, especially with reference to Stoeckel. The creation of a European identity is possible, but, is not an exclusive identity, given that each individual person and nation have their own cultural identities that can coexist with a greater panEuropean identity. European identity is formed through integration, which is why the development of European CFSP, the euro, and programs like studying abroad with the Erasmus are paramount to the European Union. Only through joint experiences and values can a European identity continue to grow and evolve to reach more people. In the film L'Auberge Espagnole, an economics student from France, Xavier, leaves his home to study abroad in Barcelona with the Erasmus, where he lives in an apartment with fellow students from Spain, Germany, England, and Denmark. Through their college and “coming-of-age” struggles, the audience is not only able to see their individual responses, but how the group of diverse students (nationality, religion, sexuality) are able to work together to grow individually and as a metaphor for an integrated Europe. L'Auberge Espagnole displays European integration on a small scale, with students from vastly different European countries able to thrive under the same roof and integrate with the European identity. In the film, identities clash and often stereotypes of different European states are explored. Whenever a stereotype was purposefully portrayed in the film, both characters from that country and elsewhere react against them. An example of this early in the film is when Anne-Sophie and Xavier are walking around Barcelona and she says that the town is “dirty” and some corners “are third-world”, Xavier immediately reacts to this telling her that her comments are “racist”. Another more prominent example comes later in the film, when Wendy’s British brother stays in the apartment for some time. Throughout his time there, he mocks the others in accents and even impersonates the Nazi salute to the German student when making comments on his non-stop hardworking nature and the cleanliness of his side of the room. In these situations, both those being mocked and witnessing respond with annoyance, but more showing, Wendy calls her brother out on his behavior and tells him to leave and that he needs to grow-up. For me, the unequivocal responses to these examples of stereotypes was telling, regardless of their own national identity, none of the students in the apartment would allow for racist or xenophobic conversation. This opposition to stereotypes in the film make a compelling argument for European integration and globalization, and in the fridge at the apartment each of their own respective culture’s foods and beverages have a space, but are spilling over with one another and consumed by everyone in the apartment. Above the phone in the apartment, a sheet has listed different responses to callers of different European languages. Both of these examples of stereotypes and the fridge in their apartment show integration between the different students in the apartment, and how they can live together avoiding major arguments, the apartmentL'Auberge in Espagnole acting as a microcosm for the integration of Europe and the different qualities and characteristics that can live together under one roof. The question of the formation of a European Identity is complex. The film L'Auberge Espagnole, although fictional, addresses these questions in a way, but the reality is arguably much more complex, with many Europeans having not had experiences with diverse European groups and views that are complicated with nationalistic tendencies and even misinformation. Essentially, people don’t view political issues or other opinion-based decisions in an exclusively positive or negative way, their current opinions and thoughts are influenced by the media around them and past experiences. Stoeckel establishes this with context to the European Union as ambivalence, and contrasts the notion against indifference in attitudes towards the European Union. Notably, citizens are more ambivalent and less positive about the European Union when “elite division” in integration is focused on in policy or media, and trust in the European Union and its institutions decrease both indifference and ambivalence towards the European Union and integration. Using research of psychologists as well as his own research, Stockel finds that those with ambivalent attitudes are held with less certainty, are retrieved more difficulty from memory, and are even more vulnerable to persuasion than one-sided views, which makes sense, one who acknowledges both sides of an argument could be persuaded more easily to a side than an individual who strongly stays in their camp. With regards to the EU, Stockel believes that understanding ambivalence in Europe is necessary to understand public opinion on European integration and how the extreme right and left wing parties can gain traction in the European Parliament or referendum campaigns from the EU. Stockel also believes that ambivalence and indifference are formed from both cognitive and affective cues. Cognitive cues being European Union-specific knowledge, political understandings from the news media, and cues sent directly from EU political parties (on both sides of the aisle, competing). Affective cues are formed from feelings of attachment to Europe and a trust in EU institutions. These two different sources impact opinions in similar ways and are constantly developing in an individual’s life. Similar to how ambivalent attitudes are more likely to be persuaded, understanding how Europeans form their beliefs on the European Union and other institutions is crucial for securing public support and the wellbeing of European integration. Both ambivalent and indifferent opinions towards the European Union and European integration play a role in the formation and possibility of a European identity. How and why Europeans think about institutions like the European Union and the future of Europe as shown in the Eurobarometer can determine if they are accepting of a European identity. As mentioned earlier in this response, the “European Identity” is only possible with European integration and shared experiences, but is entirely possible.