american history is whe is a certain distinction between the British approach to European integration and that of most other member states. While many European politicians wish to move closer towards a federal Europe most British politicians support a more cautious intergovernmental approach. With this debate already initiated, there still stands the fundamental question of whether or not Britain would benefit from further integration with Europe.
There are many historical and political reasons why further European integration would not benefit the UK. Britain has had continuity of its political institutions since 1688, in comparison with some current member states that have had as many as 11 different political systems in the same period. We are very much used to the status quo, and most people feel reluctant to let centuries of tradition go to waste. British people generally feel separated from Europe in more ways than simply geographically.
Britain’s insularity means we are literally separate from the rest of Europe, and have not been directly involved in either world war, but even so, we still feel a sense of pride in our nation after coming out of conflicts victorious against European enemies. British people see further integration as a threat to the national identity and culture. We do not want to be made “all
European.” Britain is said to be reluctant to limit itself to an exclusively
European role, partly due to the history of Britain as a world power with a massive empire, but overall it seems that the people want a balance of power on the continent, avoiding permanent commitments. The conservative approach of UK politicians has hugely influenced public opinion over the last 50 or so years. Democratically, further European integration means a loss of power and a loss of sovereignty. Already some people feel as though we are “run by Brussels,” suffering the laws and regulations which we have not approved or even had a say on – further integration would make this all the more apparent to every one of us, particularly as EU law has precedence over UK law. Europe means bureaucracy to many, and this signifies inefficient government and money wasted, but most importantly, further European integration means significant changes to democracy as we know it. As previous President of the EU, Jacques Delors, said: “Yes, we have to have transfers of sovereignty to achieve economic and monetary union.”
“It is a myth that our membership of the Community will suffocate national tradition and culture. Are the Germans any less German for being in the
Community, or the French any less French? Of course they are not!”
In his book Resurgence of the West, Rosecrance claims that after centuries of success, the United States is facing an economic and political decline due to the rise of China. He suggests that the United States can fix this problem by one of two ways. The first is isolationism, but that means the United States will have to completely remove itself from international affairs. On the other hand, Rosecrance proposes that the United States form an economic coalition with Europe, to stand up against rising China and ‘non-western’ countries. Eventually, both regions will witness an economic prosperity through this merger. As a result, this will prompt China and other ‘non-western’ nations to join this alliance.
Many people would agree that Europe is a continent in which regions identify with each other even if they are not part of the same country. For that reason, as well as others, in 1957 the Treaty of Rome "declared a common European market as a European objective with the aim of increasing economic prosperity and contributing to 'an ever closer union among the peoples of Europe'" (www.euro.ecb.int). Later, in 1986 and then in 1992, the Single European Act and the Treaty of European Union tried to build on the previous treaty to create a system in Europe in which one currency could eventually be used all over the land under the heading of the Economic and Monetary Union. (www.euro.ecb.int) However, the question remains, why would the leaders of various European nations want to create one currency when the rights of national sovereignty have always been an issue for countries all over the world. Why, in 1998 did they create the European Central Bank, and why in "The third stage of EMU... on 1 January 1999, when the exchange rates of the participating currencies were irrevocably set" (www.euro.ecb.int) did eleven, and later twelve, countries link themselves economically in a way that has never been done before?
Following the post-World War II carnage and violence, a new Europe arose from the ashes. This new Europe was decimated from the intermittent fighting between the Allied and Axis powers during the second great war and the nations of Europe sought to devise a plan that to avoid further war-time conflicts within the region. The European Coal and Steel Committee was the first advent of assembling nations together in political and economic interest. The ECSC was formed in 1950 with the signing of the Treaty of Paris whose signatories included West Germany , Italy, Luxembourg, Belgium, France and The Netherlands.
After the Second World War, Europe established its week points and the danger coming from nationalisation that had distressed the continent. The idea of the European Union was to gather all leaders from the European states and get them to work together and create a strong union that would diminish the possibility of future wars, although there was a certain ideological groundswell in favour of a United Europe shortly after world war two the European Union did not come in to existence until a later date.
even though they were a part of the war, so were the allies, yet they
After a long history of wars and conflicts the european countries decided in the middle of the 1940`s that they have to find a way to anchor peace for the continent and find new ways to balance their payment-deficits. After World War II Europe suffered a lot under the destruction and low economies.
Would you seek to acquire a company within the European Union or outside of it? Why?
In this essay I will be discussing the reasons behind the creation of the European Union. I will be go into detail on the condition of Europe post World War Two and the division between the East and West which was caused by ongoing tension between the United States of America and USSR. I will state the advantages and disadvantages of being a member of the European Union and whether the European Union has been a success or not.
Imagine having to conform oneself to a particular way of thinking because someone told you to. Now imagine being governed upon by a certain entity that knows nothing about your country 's struggles and only focuses on the larger picture at hand. Many would point to this example as an empire establishing control over a colony, such as the British empire that once ruled upon the thirteen colonies. However, this is not an example of the past oppression of sovereign nations; this is a case of the current oppression of twenty-eight sovereign nations. While individual countries reap the benefit of being part of this oppressive union known as the European Union, other suffer the consequence of not having a voice in discussions. In turn with particular nations voices being heard over other nations the balance of equality in this union is lost completely. Being a member of the European Union no longer benefits a nation in any substantial way, however, it does,
“From time to time it is worth reminding ourselves why twenty-seven European nation states have come together voluntarily to form the partnership that is the European Union.” 1
The enlargement of the European Union (EU) in 2004 and 2007 has been termed as the largest single expansion of the EU with a total of 12 new member states – bringing the number of members to 27 – and more than 77 million citizens joining the Commission (Murphy 2006, Neueder 2003, Ross 2011). A majority of the new member states in this enlargement are from the eastern part of the continent and were countries that had just emerged from communist economies (EC 2009, Ross 2011), although overall, the enlargement also saw new member states from very different economic, social and political compared to that of the old member states (EC 2009, Ross 2011). This enlargement was also a historical significance in European history, for it saw the reunification of Europe since the Cold War in a world of increasing globalization (EC 2009, Mulle et al. 2013, Ross 2011). For that, overall, this enlargement is considered by many to have been a great success for the EU and its citizens but it is not without its problems and challenges (EC 2009, Mulle et al. 2013, Ross 2011). This essay will thus examine the impact of the 2004/2007 enlargements from two perspectives: firstly, the impact of the enlargements on the EU as a whole, and thereafter, how the enlargements have affected the new member states that were acceded during the 2004/2007 periods. Included in the essay will be the extent of their integration into the EU and how being a part of the Commission has contributed to their development as nation states. Following that, this essay will then evaluate the overall success of the enlargement process and whether the EU or the new member states have both benefited from the accessions or whether the enlargement has only proven advantageous to one th...
The European Union is a collection of 28 member nations who share an economic and political bond. They all exist on the continent of Europe and share the currency of the Euro. It is a bit like a club, to join in you have to agree to follow the rules and in return you get certain benefits. Each country has to pay money to be a member and they mostly do this through taxes.
Britain's entry into the European Economic Community was a source of great conflict in Europe. There were suspicions that French President de Gaulle did not want Britain to enter in order to maintain his country's hegemony over the EEC. De Gaulle spoke of the cultural and institutional differences that would make Britain incompatible with the Six. The British governments motives were even questioned as to whether they only wanted to reap the economic benefits of the EEC. The following is my assessment of these situations according to the Salmon documents.
The link between internationalization, governance and democracy is a central problem for politics as well as for political science. Even if clear evidence on the nature of this link is not yet available, the literature seems to support the view that internationalization both undermines the capacity for governance and puts into question traditional forms of democracy.
The way I would see it, the European Union is on the one hand a very interesting set of international relationships which have gone beyond pure inter-state relations. Contemporary European Studies is an interdisciplinary field of study that focuses on current developments in European integration often in combination with modern languages. A Bachelor degree in European Studies is a degree program that covers a wide range of subjects, including European languages, fine arts and civilizations. People who studied this program have developed a comprehensive understanding of numerous European geographic regions, law, cultures, history, politics and philosophical dimensions . The reasons that clarify my enthusiasm toward this program are: