In the face of major challenges in the past four years, European leaders have demonstrated their determination to tackle and resolve the adverse consequences of the banking and sovereign debt crisis and restore economic stability and growth.
These consequences are not merely financial and economic, but have become political – as questions on the future of the EU are constantly being raised – and, at the same time social, as citizens all over Europe are suffering from the scourges of the recession, in particular, unemployment. Thus, the beginning of 2013 finds the European Union needing to deliver on its principal promise: prosperity for its citizens. This of course, cannot be the result of a magic concoction, but rather the outcome of the decision and effective implementation of important measures that will result in overcoming current stagnation and demonstrating progress.
The means to achieve progress and growth are not theoretical debates and passive decision-making. It consists of key measures promoting structural reform, enhancing the internal market and investing in trade relations. The way forward for some of us is clearly fostering growth through policies that will restore credibility by stabilisation of public finances and structural reforms. Some others are still agnostic on the modalities and the right mix of policies that will lead us out of the crisis. Still, we all agree on the need to restore credibility to and confidence of both the markets and the citizens and to preserve and enhance the quality and strengths of our European social models and our anthropocentric society.
The end of 2012 found the European Council agreeing on the next steps for a genuine economic and monetary union. The core actions therein will, in essence, result in an even more integrated economy. This does not, however, mean that further integration will come at the expense of the existing community of 27 – that will become 28 in July. Simply, it must be acknowledged that not all member states want, or can, move at the same pace in the process of integration. The ever-increasing divergences of the modalities of being together in the EU are defining the new reality of the operation of the union. They have to, therefore, be directed so as to become orbiters and not centrifugal forces.
And as theoretical discussions for ‘more’ or ‘less’ Europe are ongoing, the EU is starting to look – as it was recently put – more as a three-lane highway, since progressing in parallel lanes is in reality already part of the EU’s modus operandi. This is why it is imperative to retain and safeguard a strict ‘driving code’, which should be our common vision for an expansively polymorphic union that will be – in the words of Schuman – “solidly united and constructed around a strong framework”.
Thus, it is necessary to put in place a form of agreed and coordinated differentiation and ensure that the right bridges between those different speed groups exist. These are questions that need to be addressed within the next years and which were also raised by British Prime Minister, David Cameron, in his speech on January 23 on the future of Europe and the UK’s role within it. The difference being, that what we are suggesting here is that this coordinated differentiation should be an implicit one and of a temporary and de facto nature; whereas Mr Cameron talks of a “de jure” and permanent differentiation, where the UK will not be a full member but will “choose and pick” and will have a special relation with the EU. Naturally, this idea has been perceived by Europeans as going a bit too far and rather hard to accept and digest.
As Jacques Delors recently put it, “if some countries want to go further while respecting the rules of the whole, they should be allowed to do so”. However, for such differentiation to exist without blocking further integration the proper framework needs to be established and conditions set so as to avoid creating too much of a gap, ideally opting for the temporary and well-defined differences in pace and scope, thus safeguarding the rationale of the European unification process. It is important not to forget that its essence is co-substantial to its inception as a formidable peace building process and an intrinsically and eminently political process, with a lofty teleological aspiration of a Europe being a space of prosperity and a beacon for value-based progress and development in the world.
In effect, this means defending the core European ideals of equality, pluralism, freedom, solidarity and fairness which lie at the heart of the EU. This has become more imperative as the elusive nature of prosperity in times of crisis, risks to create a platform for euroscepticism and xenophobia, which must be addressed before it penetrates even further into the minds of European citizens.
At this point in time, we should refrain from getting entangled in endless teleological debates and opt for a more functional approach. European leaders must act with commitment and determination to find suitable solutions. And these solutions need to ensure quality of life of the citizens in the kind of community that we aspire to. We need to make choices; we can’t keep contemplating and postponing decisions, waiting for the ideal scenario to be on the table. We need to decide and move forward the European project. We need a new deal and a renewed osmosis between the people and institutions, between institutions and a new brewing together of what cements our renewed European commitment. “Nothing is possible without the people. Nothing is durable without the institutions,” Jean Monnet wrote in his memoirs.
We need synergies and complementarities, and a more rational, rather than emotional approach that will lay the ground for our pluralism to flourish and for our civilisation to lay the ground for the new European social contract, which will allow us to bequeath a better Europe to the younger generations.
Deputy Minister for European Affairs Andreas D Mavroyiannis oversaw the Cyprus EU presidency last year.
