The New Europe:  Superstate, Federation or Empire?

Jan Zielonka.  2001.   "How New Enlgarged Borders will Reshape the European Union."  Journal of Common Market Studies, 30 (3):  507-36. (Available electronically through Foley Library.)

Where is the EU going?

"Are we in the process of building a federal European state or something entirely novel?" (508)

Super-state, controversial

Favorite scare tactic of the Euroskeptic right

Gates of Vienna

The Daily Stormer

Federalism

Is a dirty word in much of Europe

hence, the intentional ambiguity in EU lingo, not an officially stated goal

Germany, however, tends to look favorably on the idea

Joschka Fisher speech at Humboldt University in 2000, cited by Zielonka, just one example of its urging in this direction

Why does Germany like this idea?

Federalism or super-state

Either way, Zielonka asserts that a

“state” must have:

central government

citizenship

legitimacy to

1) collect taxes and

2) use violence

borders

As borders expand, the nature of the European “state” changes

Zielonka’s prediction: neo-medieval empire rather than post-Westphalian super-state more likely, preferable form

Note: these are metaphors, ideal types

Bases of this distinction:

Westphalian States are about:

Concentrating power

Hierarchy

Sovereignty

Clear-cut identity

Fixed and relatively hard external border lines

Medieval Empires are about:

Overlapping authorities

Divided sovereignty

Diversified institutional arrangements

Multiple identities

Soft border zones that undergo regular adjustments

Table 1 extrapolates these characteristics for these (somewhat altered by Brunell)

Post-Westphalian Super State	Neo-Medieval Empire
Hard and fixed external borders	Soft border zones in flux
Relatively high socio-economic homogeneity	Socio-economic discrepancies persist
Pan-European cultural identity	Multiple cultural identities
Overlap, i.e., coterminous, legal, administrative, economic and military regimes	Dissociation between authoritative allocations, functional competencies and territorial constituencies
A clear hierarchical structure with one centre of authority	Interpenetration of various types of political units and loyalties
A sharp and crucial distinction between EU members and non-members	Distinction between European centre and periphery significant in fact but often glossed over, intentionally blurred in practice
Redistribution centrally regulated within closed EU system	Redistribution based on different types of solidarity between various transnational networks
One single type of citizenship	Multiple types of citizenship with different sets of rights and duties
Single European military and police force (security apparatus; foreign policy)	Multiple military and police institutions (and variable/multiple security arrangements) Other metaphors/terms for this: concentric circles; variable geometry
Absolute sovereignty regained	Divided sovereignty along different functional and territorial lines

Difficult to say which model is now prevalent

What do you think?

Which most closely approximates the EU/Europe today?

Give examples of why

NUTS Regions

Is it heading more clearly in one direction or the other?

What forces, conditions, events are pushing it in the direction of the post-Westphalian super-state?

What forces, conditions, events are pushing it in the direction of a neo-medieval empire?

Zielonka discusses several areas of convergence/divergence

Economy

Structure

Standards of Living

Unemployment

Law

Formal

In Practice

Influence of political culture

Jowitt’s “opportunistic mimicry”

Democracy

Constitutions

Institutions

Rights

But still low levels of trust in political institutions

in CE

Higher levels of socialism (low level of self-responsibility, high level of solidarity with disadvantaged)

Low levels of republicanism (i.e., low levels of civic engagement, trust in others)

However, fault lines here runs through much of Europe

Spain and Finland low, too

In general, larger gap between S and E and W/CE that between W and E

Ethnic composition