D+C Development and Cooperation (No. 1, January/February 2001, p. 3)

Started in the aftermath of two devastating wars and their nationalist and racist excesses, European integration drew its inspiration from the insight that each of the nations was too weak and too badly affected by the war to be able to stand alone. The first project of the original six founding states in 1951 was the establishment of a common market in the then crucial industrial sectors of coal and steel. In 1957, this grew into the European Economic Community which aimed at a common market through the abolition of customs, a harmonisation of economic policies, and mobility of capital and labour within the community. Four decades later the Community - now named European Union - has not only 15 member states but a wide range of institutions including a parliament, a court of justice, a central bank, a common currency and a quasi-government in form of the European Commission with far-reaching competencies infringing in many instances of the sovereign rights of member states.

When looked upon from the outside, the process of European integration during the last 50 years appears to be an unqualified success. The fact that at least a dozen states from Eastern Europe and the Mediterranean are lining up to join the European Union is proof enough for its continued attractiveness. Seen from inside, however, the state of the Union leaves much to be desired. The recent ministerial conference at the French city of Nice which was to decide on important reforms of the EU and make it fit for the admission of new member states nearly ended in failure. After four days of painful bargaining, only a minimum consensus was reached on how to push on with the process of integration in the future.

What are the main sticking points? First of all one has to realise that national identities and ideosyncracies in Europe are still very strong despite the long years of gradual integration. Different languages, different customs, different historical experiences and the mutual suspicions dating back to centuries of rivalry and struggle for dominance still haunt the peoples of Europe. It is not easy for the French to concede to the Germans a larger role in the EU even though Germany's population is 23 million larger; the British who have lived for centuries in splendid isolation from the Continent find it difficult, if not intolerable, to sacrifice essential elements of their sovereignty to European bureaucrats in Brussels; the Spanish wish to extract as many economic benefits as possible from the EU but are not prepared to share with the future new members in far-away Eastern Europe; and many of the smaller member states fear to be dominated and outvoted by the Big Four in the Union - Germany, France, Britain, and Italy.

For all these reasons, the enthusiasm of many Europeans for the project of European union has waned. Added to this are the fears that one day power may completely switch to a remote central government which is unaware of the real needs of the people. In the days of globalisation, people feel more at home and protected in their local communities, in the regions within Europe, or within their national borders. These fears may be irrational since supra-national integration offers them a better chance to succeed in the larger, globalised world. But they are nevertheless real, and politicians must take them into account.

The snail's pace at which Europe is crawling ahead towards eventual full political union is a consequence of the still existing reservations which large sections of the people have in regard to more integration. In democratic societies, it is not possible to proceed with this project without first creating acceptance for its results. However, considering that there is no historical parallel to this creation of a new political entity out of 27 sovereign independent states, Europe should be satisfied with what has been achieved so far.