Page-1

The Legitimacy and Political Theory of the European Union

Ivan Glinski 7/8/11 Dr. Corliss Tacosa Georgetown Session I

Page-2

We Americans are still conditioned by our memory of the Old Europe as a composite of thousands of once walled cities and surrounding countrysides nested inside dozens of rigidly marked-off national boundaries... [t]here is a new experiment taking place in Europe. The whole of Europe has become a testing ground for re-thinking commerce and politics and for reimagining how people might conduct their lives with one another. The raw figures are daunting and give an idea of the breadth and scope, the sheer magnitude of the experiment (Jeremy Rifkin, The European Dream, 59-60).

The Legitimacy and Political Theory of the European Union

The European Union, or EU, has been in the making for almost sixty years and has recently been gaining momentum. After thousands of years of bloody conflicts over borders, the creation of the EU was he greatest event in the evolution of states since the Treaty of Westphalia. Borders were virtually abolished, free trade was given precedence throughout most of the continent, a common currency and market was established, and European Law was given precedence over the laws of any member country. And as Jeremy Rifkin stated, [t]he raw figures are daunting1. The Population of the Union is around 502 Million, the third largest after India and China; it has the highest GDP (both nominal and in Purchasing Power Parity) in the world; and the largest population with a very hight Human development index than any other Jeremy Rifkin, The European Dream (New York: Penguin, 2004)

Page-3

continent.2 Now many people would say that these statistics are not accurate in that they are comparing the EU to other states when the EU is not a sovereign country. While this maybe true for the present, the EU is changing and embracing a more centralized and federalized character. This essay will go into the depths of the discussion on the legitimacy of the EU, both in political theory and in the eyes of Europeans. How much control should the bureaucracy in Brussels have over the everyday business of the governments of individual member states? Is the European Union a new type of state, and if so, how does our understanding of the state system change? Questions like these will be discussed, and although there isnt a 100% correct answer, the reader will be able to grasp the extent of the debate and make their own conclusions. After these debates have been reviewed, this essay will apply that knowledge to a specific crisis, Greek debt, in order to put it into a better perspective. Solutions to both the Debt crisis including giving countries in economic crises greater leeway in their economies and increasing public spending will be reviewed, as well as well as the argument that the European Union should be more centralized while at the same time democratic. Authority has been delegated more and more from the state to the European level, especially in the recent years since the passing of the Lisbon Treaty. Now most people know to that the EU is an economic union in which there is a common currency, the Euro, and a common market. However the extent of this Union authority in other policy areas like foreign policy, justice, and energy are often left out.3 In order to understand the political theory and the

Jeremy Rifkin

Jurgen Neyer and Antje Wiener, eds. Political Theory of the European Union (New York: Oxford University press, 2011)
3

Page-4

principles that the Union stands upon, one needs to first understand the workings of the institutions that its composed of. The European Central Bank, ECB, is based in Frankfurt, Germany. Its purpose is to keep prices stable and to keep the financial system stable, by preventing neither inflation or deflation from getting too high. It accomplishes this through the regulation of the monetary policy of the EU including interest rates and the money supply as well as ensuring that financial institutions are supervised by individual states. 4 The ECB is often said to be an independent body because isn't very transparent and has broad discretionary powers. Its six executive members, although appointed by the members of the Eurozone, are not responsible for the individual countries, but for the Eurozone in general. To counter these threats of greater independence, the ECB is responsible for submitting an annual report to the European Parliament, EP, which can hold a debate on the report as well as meet with individual members.5 Another policy that has been relegated to the European level is international relations, which has ben standardized in a series of institutions known as the Common Foreign and Security Policy, or CFSP. 6 Whats surprising is that such an institution even exists; and that it operates by consensus. In addition, the Lisbon Treaty introduced a new position, the High Representative, in order to chair the meetings and act as the foreign minister of the EU.7 All

"EU institutions and other bodies," Europa, accessed July 8, 2011, http://europa.eu/about-eu/institutions-bodies/index_en.htm.
4

Peterson and Michael Shackleten, The Institutions of the European Union, 2nd ed., The New European Union Series (New York: Oxford University Press, 2006)
5 6 7

John

Ibid

"EU institutions and other bodies,"

Page-5

members must follow the policies agreed on by all members. This agency is represented by several bodies including foreign ministers and experts, so in essence its more accountable than the ECB since if their party looses national elections, they loose their position. Justice has also been shifted to a European focus, with the establishment of the European Court of Justice, or ECJ. It acts like a supreme court, with a panel of twenty-seven judges, one from each country. It has judged many high-profile cases and has been instrumental in clarifying European Law. 8 Some other prominent policies considered by all members are Police and judicial Co-operation, Energy, the Environment, and Agriculture. What does all of this mean? More and more, decisions are being taken away from state legislators and executives and being instead delegated to specialists. This depoliticization of policy has become a major concern in the EU. If the EU is to become a new state in it of itself, will it still carry the same ideals of democracy and a dialogue between the government and the governed? This is where the conspiracy theorists argue that a supranational government will these rights away and limit the voice of the people. Although these accusations are overblown, there might be just some truth in them and they must be explored. Before this is done however, the question of what is the nature of the EU must be addressed, because with understanding the fundamental structure of the EU, none of this can be actively discussed. There are currently three different views that experts claim: the first is that its an intergovernmental organization in which sovereign governments work together to solve problems that they usually wouldnt be able to, the second is that its a supranational state, in

Jurgen Neyer and Antje Wiener, eds.

Page-6

which governments pool their sovereignty to create one giant state, and the third is that of a regulatory agency, in which experts come together in agencies in order to solve problems.9 In the intergovernmental interpretation, sovereign governments are the most important players. They are legitimized by elections by the people and direct accountability. People vote for politicians and executives who nominate representatives for the EU or are the representatives themselves. If people dont approve of the policies or the nominations, they can vote-out the party in power to show their dissatisfaction. An intergovernmental model has as much legitimacy as the governments that it is composed of. Now the supranational position creates a new state, but on the European level. In theory, it would function as any other government does, with its own legislature, executive, justice system, elections, and a system of checks and balances. Of course the EU has not reached that step yet and is still a long way off, however this trend has been increasing in recent years and promises to become more relevant. Currently, the EU does have the skeleton of a organized democratic state with a directly elected parliament, an executive, a justice system, and checks and balances on each. However this system is still in its infancy and democratic qualifications including its transparency and accountability have been often criticized. 10 The third interpretation, as EU as a regulatory agency places legitimacy in very different ideals. Unlike an intergovernmental or supranational organization who base their legitimacy on democracy input from the people, who believe that they can influence the polices

Mark Bovens, Deirdre Curtin, and Paul Hart, eds. The Real World of EU Accountability (New York: Oxford University Press, 2010)
9

Beate Kohler-Koch et al., "Charting Crowded Teritory; Democrary; The European Parliament between Policy-making and Control," in Debating the Democratic Legitimacy of the European Union (New York; Toronto; Plymouth, UK: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2007)
10

Page-7

of the government, a regulatory agency bases its legitimacy on its performance. The idea is that a regulatory agency is not supposed to get involved in politics, since doing so could compromise its work. People try to leave experts out of politics and allow them to do their work in peace. As long as they do their job, a regulating agency is legitimate in peoples eyes. Now that these perceptions have been reviewed, the main institutions of the EU can be analyzed under them. One of the crucial debates going on right now about the legitimacy of the EU is that of the democratic deficit against the idea of depoliticization. Experts who analyze the EU through the supranational interpretation stress the lack of democratic ideals in the EU such as accountability, transparency, and dialogue between citizens and governments. Without these principles, they allege, the organization has no democratic legitimacy. However others arguing from the intergovernmental or transnational perspective allege that democratic legitimacy isnt required since, from the intergovernmental, there already is already legitimacy from the national governments, or from the regulatory, that legitimacy is measured not by democracy, but by effectiveness.11 How do different institutions add up to these ideals? The EU has a strong legislative body, organized into the European Parliament, or EP, the Council of the European Union, and the European Commission, or EC. How do these institutions fare in the debate between democratic deficit and depoliticization. The European Parliament, EP, is the lower house of the EU. Although the EP cannot introduce legislature, it goes through a process with the European Council called co-decision in which both houses must agree on a certain bill. It is the only institution to be directly elected by the people, with elections occurring all around Europe every five years. This gives it direct democratic legitimacy. Not only is it

11

Mark Bovens, Deirdre Curtin, and Paul Hart, eds.

Page-8

politically accountable, individual members are also legally accountable through the ECJ and the Court of Auditors, and and socially accountable to interest groups. On account of these factors, power of the EP as a check on other institutions has been increasing, especially with the recent Lisbon Treaty. The EP is the closest that the EU has to a fledging democracy, however there are many issues with the lack of real democracy. The sheer size of the EP, currently at 736 members, and the twenty-three odd languages spoken there, make it bulky and often very bureaucratic and inefficient.12 Nevertheless, it has been able to exercise a greater role in the Union than ever before, mostly in a role of a check on other institutions. As was stated earlier, it serves as a check on the ECB, discussing its annual report. In addition, the EP services as a check on the executive power of the EC, having the ability to reject appointments to the EC and well as force the resignation of the whole Commission. It also holds supervisory powers over European agencies.13 The EP could be called the true center of democratic legitimacy in the EU, which it then transmits to other institutions by way of checks and balances. The European Commission, EC, has been the center of the EU, acting both as a legislative and executive body. The EC has historically been less democratic and accountable than other institutions. It was originally made to be insulated from national politics, which people feared would compromise the efficiency of the Commission. During the Santer Commission (1995-1999), the Commission tried to pass several initiatives to increase its executive power, however they failed and tarnished the Commission's popularity. After large fraud allegations, the EP threatened to vote the Commission out of office, resulting in the resignation of all the

12

John Peterson and Michael Shackleten Jurgen Neyer and Antje Wiener, eds.

13

Page-9

members. However the nature of the EC began to change during the Prodi and Barroso Commissions, during which accountability and transparency dramatically increased.14 The twenty-seven Commissioners, one appointed by each country, serve the Commission for five years, after which they can be re-confirmed by the EP. Although they are appointed from a single country, their mandate is not to represent their country, but to work for the interests of all the EU member nations. In recent times the EC has become more accountable to other institutions as the EP was given greater power in order to check that of the Commission. The EP can scrutinize any Commissioner if there is suspicion of malpractice, and the whole group can be dismissed through a vote of no confidence. It is also accountable to the European Court of Auditors, who if they sense any financial fraud, may send the case to the ECJ. Another judicial check on the EC is the European Ombudsmen, who hears cases brought by either EU citizens or entity; 60%-70% of them are related to the EC. In addition, the Commission itself has initiated public accountability in the form of the European Transparency Initiative. It sought to increase the transparency of interest groups, the use of EU funds, clarifying ethical standards for civil servants, and expanding public access to documents.15 Certainly, there are now many checks in place to prevent the rise of a too strong central executive in the EU. Another source of controversy in the EU are semi-autonomous agencies. In the past decade, there has been a large proliferation of these agencies which are assigned specific policies or conflicts to manage such as the European Environmental Agency or the European Food Safety Authority. These agencies were created to delegate certain functions of the Commission, who could not discuss every major issue, in order that the agencies could do research and provide
14 15

Mark Bovens, Deirdre Curtin, and Paul Hart, eds.

Ibid

Page-10

policy recommendations to the EC. These agencies dont possess any discretionary powers and are monitored by the EC.16 Nevertheless, there is popular sentiment of them being hidden to the public and the fear that they will start to compose policy independently. Looking at these facts, it seems at first that the debate about a Democratic Deficit is just a myth as all of the institutions mentioned have checks and balances, preventing them from usurping the role of the democratic EP or that of national governments. So why the myth? The Democratic Deficit had only become addressed in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Before, when the EU was first established as the European Coal and Steel Community, ECSC, there wasnt any debate since the organization wasnt as broad in scope. It was composed of experts and ministers appointed by member states who would agree on economic policies as well as prevent wars between member states. World War II devastated the continent and convinced many that the ECSC was necessary in order to prevent another world war, and therefore gave it enough power to do so.17 However this consensus period started coming to an end in the early 1990s with the strengthening of the EU institutions including the EP and EC with the passing of the Maastricht Treaty. And with the crisis of the Santer Commission, there was a large feeling of mistrust among EU Citizens. There was a new perception of a Brussels Eurocrat who worked in secrecy under the supervision of no one, and received large monetary benefits. People became disillusioned with the Union; voting participation in EP elections has fallen seven times straight. Soon Euroskeptics, who had earlier received little attention earlier, began a series of campaigns to prevent the continued federalism of the EU, which they saw as a threat to the sovereignty of states. These perceptions led to the rejection of the proposed European Constitution in 2005 by
16 17

"EU institutions and other bodies," Beate Kohler-Koch et al.

Page-11

both French and Dutch voters. These voters did not see the EU as a legitimate representative of their rights.18 These types of conflicts that undermine the very foundations of the legitimacy of the EU at a time when Polish Prime Minister Tusk says, A united Europe, more solidarity and further integration is the answer to the crisis that Europe faces today.19 The core problem of the Greek Financial Crisis arises from this lack of identity with the European Union. Its a battleground between Euroskeptics claiming that the Euro would never work with the ECB based in Germany trying to control the economy of 27 states and calling for a de-Europeanization of the economy and Euro supporters who criticize the Greek government for lying about its debt while at the same time pouring almost 1 Trillion Euros into the Greek economy. Under the regulation of the ECB, to enter the EuroZone, a country must adhere to several guidelines including an inflation rate of less than 1% and a gross government debt to GDP of less than 60%.20 Greece, because of its long history of social services and public spending, was not eager to commit to these guidelines. However the Euro was too good of a benefit compared to the largely devalued drachma for the country to avoid. So the government paid off several major banks including Goldman Sachs to hide the money that the government had borrowed. In result, the country didnt have to cut much of the social services and its citizens had grown used to.

18

Mark Bovens, Deirdre Curtin, and Paul Hart, eds.

"A united Europe is the answer to the crisis," Council of the European Union, accessed July 8, 2011, last modified July 6, 2011, http://www.consilium.europa.eu/showFocus.aspx?id=1&focusid=634=en.
19

Oliver Schmidtke, Francisco Torres, and Chiara Zilioli, "EMU and Democracy: Governance in the Eurozone," in EMU Rules: The Political and Economic Consequences of European Monetary Integration, ed. Francisco Torres, Amy Verdun, and Hubert Zimmermann (Verlagsgesellschaft, Germany: Nomos, 2006)
20

Page-12

However, this debt began to spiral out of control and New York Times says, Over the last decade, Greece went on a debt binge. Nevertheless, the debt was hidden and Greece received positive ratings from nancial agencies, until everything changed with the start of the financial crisis. The new Prime Minister of Greece, George Papandreou, announced at his inauguration in October of 2009, that the economy was worse than people had been told. In result, the 2009 Budget Deficit was an appalling 15.4%, more than 5 times of the requirements to enter the Eurozone. In result, the other countries of the EuroZone had to bail out the Greek economy with 110 Billion. But before doing so, tough austerity measures were demanded of Papandreou in order to balance out the deficit.21 This includes harsh increases on taxes and cutting public sector wages by 10%. This has lead to large scale violent protests in Athens, who like the Aleka Papariga, the leader of the Greek Communist Party, agree that this has been blackmail against Greece by the EU. 22 This crisis is crucial in understanding the fundamental debate of EU legitimacy. Many Greeks believe that the EU is causing the current crisis through the strong restrictions and regulations of the Greek economy, and that its ignoring Greeces national interests. Not only are they questioning the policies of the EU and the ECB, but the legitimacy of their decisions altogether. This feeling has been perpetuated by Frances not so generous offers of a 30 Billion package from European Banks from which Greece will have to pay 101 Billion

"Greece," New York Times, accessed July 8, 2011, last modified June 29, 2011, http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/ greece/index.html?scp=1-spot&sq=Greece&st=cse.
21

Kerin Hope and Ralph Atkins, "Violence escalates after Greek Vote," Financial Times (London), June 30, 2011.
22

Page-13

over a 30 year period.23 Many Greeks believe that Greece, as the birthplace of Democracy and the only place to ever have a Direct Democracy, doesnt have a say in the ongoings of the EU. However the problem here is not that the ECB cannot regulate so many individual economies, in fact no EuroZone economy has ever asked for help from the IMF, but that countries like Greece believe that it doesnt have the legitimacy, democratic or not, to do so. How can the EU further integrate itself, as Prime Minister Tusk has stated, without running the crisis of another Greece where the government ignores regulation by the ECB? Several levels of solutions, including financial, administrative, informative, and cultural must be enacted to solve this complex issue. The first of these solutions would be to get Greece and the EU not to implement austerity measures such as raising taxes and lowering wages, but instead helping the private sector in Greece expand. Some of the tough measures imposed on Greece include as stated earlier, a 10% reduction in wages of public sector workers, increases in the VAT Tax, and an extraordinary tax on company profits. 24 Although these policies do increase state revenue, they slow down the economy tremendously and are bad for Greece in the long run. Something similar to the US stimulus bill of 2009, in which the US increased public spending, introducing $787 Billion into the US economy should be proposed. And although many conservatives have said that it was an economic failure, it did accelerate the US economy, which left the negative growth zone in June 2009. In addition, the Greek economy is much different than the US. Having been based on social benefits after a long rule by Socialists, the disappearance of many of these benefits will be disastrous for the economy. Greece and the EU come to a compromise, where some of the money used to pay off the debt would instead go to a
23 24

Ibid Ibid

Page-14

government stimulus bill which would use it for public spending for programs to get people back into the job market and for incentives for companies to hire more workers. In addition, taxes on small and middle sized corporations should be reduced as another incentive to hire, as Greeces economy is based more on them than on large companies. As was addressed earlier, Greeces solutions must be not only economic, but also administrative, informative, and cultural. Although it was shown earlier that EU institutions adhere to the basic democratic ideal of accountability, more must be done to show EU citizens that the EU government in Brussels and Strasbourg fully represents them and that they have a say in what goes on there. The first step for this would be to create a fully elected EU president instead of the Council of the EU choosing a candidate from the winning party in the EP elections. Creating an elected executive would create a popular and recognizable leader of the EU that more people would know because they listened to them debating on television. This would also increase participation in European elections since there will be a top candidate to vote for instead of numerous Parliament members. Also, the president of the EC would become directly accountable to the people and prevent the stereotype of an insulated Eurocratic bureaucracy. On the topic of increasing information on the EU, more must be done in education. Schools include more about the EU in their political education programs and encourage students to vote in European elections just as they would in national ones. Finally, a European identity must emerge for people to begin to fully identify with the EU. Prime Minister Tusk stated in his presidential program that, "[t]he best thing that Europeans have ever done is to unite their continent", and that "nationalism, protectionism and state-ism have always resulted in disaster." Although I dont advocate the disappearance of states and of

Page-15

state nationalism, the addition of a European nationalism would be the dening moment of the EU. So that people would not only identify as Catalonian and Spanish, but also as European. All of these solutions would strengthen Europe and provide it with another Belle poque, but only if all countries can work together for the greater good.
There are however, many problems to the above stated solutions, namely, that they are

too idealistic and would never work. Having a European President who would be popularly elected would huge campaigns by individuals stretching all across Europe. In addition, many of the qualied past presidents of the EC would most likely not run since most of them had already been executives in their native countrys government, including Jose Barroso, Romano Prodi, and Jacques Santer. The EU would not get such qualied presidents, but instead people who have the money to campaign all around the continent. Also, having more people elected would lead to a negative effect on the EU, which works well because its mostly composed of experts instead of politicians. It would be destroying the shield from politics that the EU has tried to create for such a long time. It would in no way increase identication with EU politicians, just like US citizens have little identication with the US government, even though its completely elected. Finally, creating a European Nationalism, is pure imagination. FIrst off, because state nationalism has played such a critical role in history that trying to create a nationalism that includes so many different peoples would be infeasible. Also, Europe is still too divided, culturally, ethnically, linguistically, and historically that the time that Basques would be able to identify with Estonians is still a very far way off.

Page-16

Bibliography 1. "A united Europe is the answer to the crisis." Council of the European Union. Accessed July 8, 2011. Last modified July 6, 2011. http://www.consilium.europa.eu/showFocus.aspx?id=1&focusid=634=en. Website that has excerpts for the speech by the Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk on his program for the EU during his presidency. It states that integration is the answer to the EU's crises.

2. Bovens, Mark, Deirdre Curtin, and Paul Hart, eds. The Real World of EU Accountability. New York: Oxford University Press, 2010. The main book for the ideas in the essay. Explained the myth of a democratic deficit and explained how institutions such as the European Parliament, European Commission, and agencies have checks and balances on their power.

3. Castle, Stephen. "Europe Agrees to Give Billions to Greece." New York Times, July 2, 2011. Accessed July 8, 2011. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/03/ business/global/03euro.html?ref=greece. Article about the planned bailout of Greece by the EU. Has a lot of useful statistics.

4. "EU institutions and other bodies." Europa. Accessed July 8, 2011. http://europa.eu/about-eu/institutions-bodies/index_en.htm. Official website of the European Union that outlines the basic functions of all the major EU bodies and agencies such as the European Commission and European Central Bank.

5. "Greece." New York Times. Accessed July 8, 2011. Last modified June 29, 2011. http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/greece/ index.html?scp=1-spot&sq=Greece&st=cse. New York Times page on Greece. It has a list of Times articles related to Greece as well as a summary on the Greek Debt Crisis.

Page-17

6. Hope, Kerin, and Ralph Atkins. "Violence escalates after Greek Vote." Financial Times (London), June 30, 2011. Article that talks about the austerity cuts by the Greek government and the riots that are resulting from them. Also explains the mood of betrayal in Greek by the EU. 7. Kohler-Koch, Beate, Berthold Rittberger, Armin Bogdandy, von, Ulrich Haltern, and Andreas Maurer. "Charting Crowded Teritory; Democrary; The European Parliament between Policy-making and Control." In Debating the Democratic Legitimacy of the European Union, 1-57; 75-102. New York; Toronto; Plymouth, UK: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2007. Maps out the democratic principles of the EU and stresses how important they are to providing legitimacy to the organization. Also introduces different democratic principles such as transparency and accountability.

8. Neyer, Jurgen, and Antje Wiener, eds. Political Theory of the European Union. New York: Oxford University press, 2011. First introduced the concept of the democratic deficit. Talks about the legitimacy underpinning the EU as well as introducing the debates of what the EU exactly is. Also discusses the debates of European State Sovereignty in the EU level. 9. Peterson, John, and Michael Shackleten, eds. The Institutions of the European Union. 2nd ed. The New European Union Series. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006. Describes the various institutions that make up the EU in detail including the European Parliament and Commission as well as many others. It also talks about their strengths and weaknesses as well as their accountability.

10. Rifkin, Jeremy. The European Dream. New York: Penguin, 2004. This book is about Jeremy Rifkin's interpretation on the decline of the American Dream and the rise of a new European Dream of social mobility in the context of the European Union. I got my quote from this book.

Page-18

11. Schmidtke, Oliver, Francisco Torres, and Chiara Zilioli. "EMU and Democracy: Governance in the Eurozone." In EMU Rules: The Political and Economic Consequences of European Monetary Integration, edited by Francisco Torres, Amy Verdun, and Hubert Zimmermann, 19-69. Verlagsgesellschaft, Germany: Nomos, 2006. Primarily talks about the European Central Bank and its policies and regulations. Describes how the bank works, who its accountable to and who it accounts for.