MANY Cypriots thought that European Union membership would improve our bargaining position with that organisation. It seemed logical to believe that once we became a member of the EU, this would give us greater power over non-members and particularly new applicant countries such as Turkey.
That has quite clearly not been the case. Indeed, membership in this organisation appears to have weakened our position. If anything, the EU seems to look more favourably on Turkey. Much of this is attributable to the ‘No’ vote in the Annan plan referendum, but there are also other factors at work due to changes within the EU itself which are perhaps more permanent.
By joining the EU, Cyprus has almost unwittingly become part of a new federal state. No, not the Cypriot federation so often discussed in the Annan negotiations. I refer to the EU Federal state, which is now being formed right under our noses. Starting as a loose association of nation states, the EU has now evolved into something quite different.
The latest change embodied in the new EU constitution (nearing adoption) would greatly accelerate a process of closer integration that has been going on practically since the inception of the EU. The new constitution introduces a greatly strengthened Council President, an EU Minister of Foreign Affairs, an EU military establishment and a much stronger Parliament. In other words we have in vestigial form the essential trappings of nationhood. We are witnessing the rise of a new “State of Europe”.
This change in the EU started shortly after its founding.
For some 50 years, the members of the EU have been part of a process of integration not very different from that which formed the countries of modern Europe. Italy, Germany, Britain, Spain, France, Greece and others, emerged from loose groupings of smaller statelets. Over time (sometimes hundreds of years) these were integrated into the European nations of today. The EU, following a similar process, is today a much more powerful entity than the loose group of nations that came together under the 1957 Treaty of Rome.
Of particular interest for the present situation of Cyprus within the new Europe are the changes which this evolution has wrought on decision making. In the EU’s formative years, each member state had the power of veto over virtually all decisions. It could use the veto to protect its vital interests, irrespective of what the other member states desired. This situation has changed dramatically. Today, the national veto can only be applied on a limited number of issues. Most decisions are made by a type of majority voting based on population size. The larger the EU member state in terms of population, the greater its voting power (votes) in the EU Parliament and the Council of Ministers.
Under the EU majority voting system, the power of individual states is greatly reduced. Moreover, since the EU system reflects population size, nations with large populations count more than nations with small populations like Cyprus. For example, Germany has 16 times the number of members in the European Parliament than Cyprus. Similarly in the European Council of Ministers, the larger countries have many more votes than the smaller countries.
As for the EU’s executive body, the European Commission, each nation has only a single vote. However, planned reductions in the size of the Commission will require that a number of countries will lose their membership on this body altogether. Will France, the United Kingdom or Germany be among those dropped from the Commission? Not likely. There is little doubt that the countries losing direct representation on the Commission will be selected from the smaller member countries.
But not even the larger states have decisive voting power. The large number of countries in the expanded EU dictates that even the larger EU member states must co-operate with others if they are to wield power and influence. To secure the necessary votes for a majority, all member states must inevitably rely on their ability to form and join alliances.
Winning alliances must inevitably include countries with large populations. Turkey, with a population of over 70 million, is larger than any other country in the EU with the exception of Germany (population of 82 million). But Germany’s population growth has stagnated and is projected to decline. Turkey’s population growth is one of the fastest in Europe. Given this discrepancy, it has been widely predicted that Turkey’s population will one day surpass that of Germany, making it politically the most powerful member of the European Union.
EU membership for Turkey is not certain. No doubt many EU members are considering the irony of a non-European country becoming the most powerful member of the EU. Nevertheless, it is a distinct possibility. What we see today are politicians assessing the potential value of Turkey and the votes it represents as an ally within the EU. Already they are manoeuvring to curry favour with what may one day be the largest and most influential member country.
This is unfortunately the situation Cyprus finds itself in today. Its present membership and votes are weighed against the probability of Turkey joining the EU and the enormous voting power which would accompany such membership. Sad to say, the trade-off here seems to be in favour of Turkey. Hence the rush of EU political leaders to Ankara.
The bottom line is that Cyprus finds itself in an organisation which is moving toward more centralised control and where countries with large populations will play a dominant role.
But given the fact that some issues will be decided by a narrow margin of votes, even the smaller states are offered an opportunity to make their influence felt. With astute diplomacy they can use their votes to ally themselves with coalitions which are favourable to their own proposals. The problem is that, just now, diplomacy does not seem to be our strong card.
Dr. Jim Leontiades is at the Cyprus International Institute of Management
