In the first of a series for LSE BrexitVote, Alan Sked – who founded Ukip in 1993 (but has since distanced himself from the party) – examines the EU’s structures and purpose, and looks for clues in a pamphlet published by the Union. He argues that its aim is political and not merely economic union, and recalls the experience of Yanis Varoufakis during the Greek bailout negotiations and what it reveals about the ‘democratic deficit’ that afflicts the relationship between the ‘troika’ and the rest of the EU

Sked, Alan

LSE Research Online

07/06/2016Alan Sked on the EU: part one – a superstate in the makingblogs.lse.ac.uk /brexit/2016/06/07/alan-sked-on-the-eu-part-one-a-superstate-in-the-making/In the first of a series for LSE BrexitVote, Alan Sked – who founded Ukip in 1993 (but has since distancedhimself from the party) – examines the EU’s structures and purpose, and looks for clues in apamphlet published by the Union. He argues that its aim is political and not merely economicunion, and recalls the experience of Yanis Varoufakis during the Greek bailout negotiationsand what it reveals about the ‘democratic deficit’ that afflicts the relationship between the‘troika’ and the rest of the EU.What exactly is the European Union? It is not an easy organisation to describe. Its hybridconstitution includes among other bodies a decision-making European Council (summitmeetings of the heads of government of the 28 member states), a powerful bureaucracy run by the EuropeanCommission with 30-odd departments (directorates-general), a Parliament that discusses Commission proposals,and a Supreme Court (the European Court of Justice) to rule on disputes.The Commission has its own President, as does the Council. One Commissioner heads the new EU Foreign Serviceand there is also a separate organisation – the Eurozone – for the 19 member states which employ the would-be“single currency” of the EU, the euro. Nine member states, including Britain, use their own currencies.Jean-Claude Juncker, president of the European Commission. Photo: European People’s Party via a CC-BY-2.0 licenceThe governance of the Eurozone does not relate intelligibly to the other institutions previously described. Indeed, inthe recent crisis over Greek debt, its governance seems to have been given over to a hybrid body known as the‘troika’ representing the European Commission, the European Central Bank and the International Monetary Fund.This has no constitutional basis in European law.Another body supervising the negotiations with Greece has been the ‘Eurogroup’, which also has its own President.It is supposed to be composed of the finance ministers of all Eurozone member states but when the Greek financeminister in 2015 at a crucial point in the negotiations over Greece’s debt objected to being excluded from theEurogroup and asked for legal justification for this, he was told: ‘Well, the Eurogroup does not exist in law. There isno treaty which has convened this group.’ Yanis Varoufakis, the Greek minister concerned, later commented in aninterview in the New Statesman:1/4‘So what we have is a non-existent group that has the greatest power to determine the lives ofEuropeans. It’s not answerable to anyone, given that it does not exist in law, no minutes are kept; andit’s confidential…so no citizen ever knows what is said within…These are decisions of almost life anddeath, and no member has to answer to anybody.’This is true of much of EU governance (the Council operates in secret, as do Commission committees) and is part ofthe EU’s notorious ‘democratic deficit’. Yet the lament of Jykri Katainen, the Finnish Vice-President of the EuropeanCommission in charge of jobs, growth, investment and competitiveness, that ‘we don’t change our policy accordingto elections’ was widely quoted during the Greek crisis—as if anyone had ever suggested otherwise. Meanwhile,another problem for Varoufakis during the crisis was that (according to the President of France in particular) nocountry is allowed to abandon the euro. Membership of the Eurozone is irreversible. Hence, for making contingencyplans for Greece to return to the drachma, Varoufakis was at one point considered liable to be charged with hightreason!Photo: Marc Lozano via a CC-BY-NC-SA 2.0 licenceWhat then is the purpose of the EU? What is the aim of the continuing waves of European integration, thesuccession of treaties concluded by member states and the goal of ‘ever-closer union’ laid down in the foundingtreaty of the EU, the Treaty of Rome?One way of finding out is to consult a document from the Official Publications of the European Union, whose English-language title is European Unification: The Origins and Growth of the European Community. Several editions areavailable in different languages but I will now quote from the third edition of 1989 which appears to be a translationfrom the German by a Klaus-Dieter Borchardt. The section headed ‘Political Integration’ opens as follows:‘Although the principles and measures laid down in the Treaties relate only to the establishment andoperation of the common market, economic integration is not meant to be an end in itself but merelyan intermediate stage on the road to political integration.’ [author’s emphasis]It is imperative for British voters to bear this in mind when the Remain camp talks exclusively about economicstatistics or the Single Market. The ultimate aim of the EU according to its own official publication is political NOTeconomic integration. The document then quite rightly explains that political integration can come about by either2/4‘confederalist’ or ‘federalist’ methods. The confederalist one is then rather dismissed in the sentence: ‘This is theprinciple underlying the work of the Council of Europe and the OECD’—obviously inadequately Europeaninstitutions, since they preserve the autonomy of member states. The document instead reserves its enthusiasm forthe federalist approach:‘The federalist approach, on the other hand, aims to dissolve the traditional distinctions betweenNation States. The outdated notion of inviolable and indivisible national sovereignty gives way to theview that the imperfections of social and international co-existence, the specific shortcomings of thenation State system and the dangers of the predominance of one State over others (so frequent aphenomenon in European history) can only be overcome by individual States pooling theirsovereignty under a supranational community. The result is a European federation in which thecommon destiny of its peoples—still retaining their individual identities—is guided, and their futureassured by common (federal) authorities.‘The European Community is a product of this federalist approach, though in a somewhat modifiedform owing to the Member States’ reluctance simply to abandon altogether their sovereignty and theold nation State structure which they had only just regained and consolidated after the Second WorldWar in favour of a European federation. Once again a compromise had to be found which, withoutnecessarily establishing a federal structure, would provide more than mere cooperation alongconfederal lines. The solution, both brilliant and simple, was to seek to bridge the gap betweennational autonomy and European federation in a gradual process. Rather than relinquish allsovereignty overnight, the Member States were asked merely to abandon the dogma of indivisibility.’This seems a perfectly acceptable description of the process of ‘ever-closer union’ at work before 1989. The politicalindependence of member states (‘all sovereignty’) is to disappear completely, but gradually, not ‘overnight’.There are three points to note regarding the pamphlet. First, since 1989, thanks to a number of further treaties, theEU has made substantial progress towards becoming a completely federal state. It has acquired a foreign service,an intelligence service, a police service, EU arrest warrants, a single legal personality and the absorption of theEuropean Council into the treaty structure making that body accountable to the European Court.It even asks members to give forewarning of any desire to secede from the Union so as to precipitate negotiations.In short (through the Lisbon Treaty which came into force in 2009) it now has its own constitution. Ironically, itsdesire seems to be to become just a large nation state like its perceived international rivals Russia, China and theUnited States. It has its own passport, anthem, flag, parliament, constitution, currency, police force, diplomaticservice, supreme court, civil service, intelligence service, laws and policies.  All it lacks to be a fully modern state isan elected government, armed forces and a single tax system. One should add, of course, democratic accountabilityand legitimacy.Read on: Alan Sked on the EU, part two: propaganda and pacifism from a toothless entityAlan Sked on the EU, part three: how Germany came to dominate the EUThis is the first of a series of posts by Alan Sked about the EU. It represents the views of the author and not those ofthe BrexitVote blog, nor the LSE.Alan Sked is Professor Emeritus of International History at the LSE.Copyright © 2015 London School of Economics3/44/4

Alan Sked on the EU: part one – a superstate in the making

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

LSE Research Online