Europe's next steps

Europe’s next steps RICHARD G. WHITMAN Fiftieth birthday This issue of International Affairs coincides with the 50th anniversary of the signing of the Treaty of Rome on 25 March 1957 founding the European Economic Community (EEC). In the intervening years the EEC has been transformed into a European Union (EU) and the six founding countries of the Belgium, Luxembourg, Netherlands, West Germany, France and Italy have been joined by another 21 countries during six rounds of enlargement negotiations. The current 27 member states of the EU are to mark this anniversary with the signing of a Declaration in Berlin that is intended not only to commemorate the signing of the Treaty of Rome, reflecting on the achievements of the European integration process, but also to set out their ambitions for the future of European integration. The mood among member-state governments is currently more sober than celebratory primarily because the future direction of European integration is both unsettled and contested. The EU still suffers from the ‘hangover’ of the French and Dutch ‘no’ votes in their respective referenda on the Constitutional Treaty in 2005. The Treaty was originally intended not only to engage EU citizens more closely in the Union (in particular through a Charter of Fundamental Rights) but also, crucially, to perform a number of other functions: to streamline and re-codify the existing Treaties on which the EU is established and to create a single, more accessible, text in place of multiple texts; to ease decision-making in an enlarging EU and to ensure that the EU’s institutions operate more effectively and efficiently; and to enhance further the EU’s capacity and competences in areas that include justice and home affairs and foreign and security policy. All these undertakings remain in abeyance until the future of the Constitutional Treaty is clarified. The future for the Constitutional Treaty The objective of the current German Presidency is the clarification of the future of the Constitutional Treaty. A variety of proposals have been advanced that range from pressing on with the ratification of the existing Treaty (it has been ratified by 18 of the member states); revising the Treaty to take account of the issues and concerns International Affairs 83: 1 (2007) 227–236 © 2007 The Author(s). Journal Compilation © 2007 Blackwell Publishing Ltd/The Royal Institute of International Affairs Richard G. Whitman raised by the French and Dutch public during those referenda; and replacing the Constitutional Treaty with a ‘mini treaty’ containing a limited number of its components as proposed by French presidential candidate Nicolas Sarkozy. While facing the challenge of how to determine what future direction European integration should take, the EU faces the prospect of leadership change in two key member states. A new French president will be elected in May 2007 and in the United Kingdom Prime Minister Tony Blair will be replaced by his nominated successor Gordon Brown by the middle of 2007. The implications of these leadership changes for European policy in one of the EU’s largest member states are explored in this issue by Clara Marina O’Donnell and Richard Whitman in their assessment of Gordon Brown’s position on Europe. O’Donnell and Whitman outline the agenda with which the EU is currently grappling and consider the UK’s likely stance on key issues. It is their view that the Constitutional Treaty is not one of Gordon Brown’s European policy priorities. Whatever the future for the Constitutional Treaty, the referenda no votes demonstrated a very public dissatisfaction with Europe, expressed through the voting down of an agreement forged by member-state governments, and indicated that there was a disjuncture between the views of citizens and those of their elites as to the benefits of continuous and deepening collaboration within the framework of an on-going European integration process. The uncertainly as to the future direction of European integration has had a direct impact on the future enlargement of the EU. One of the key intentions of the Constitutional Treaty was to reform the EU’s institutions to facilitate future enlargement. As the French and Dutch referendum debates made clear, publics in those countries were, however, unenthusiastic about enlargement: and not future enlargements but the enlargement that the EU had undertaken in 2004 to bring ten new member states into the Union. The EU’s institutions and its member states have subsequently been debating the Union’s ‘absorption capacity’—its ability to digest the accession of future members. This debate reflects an emerging reticence about the pace and scope of future enlargement that is augmented when the prospect of future Turkish accession is considered. The challenge of enlargement Although formal membership negotiations with Turkey opened in October 2005, Turkish accession to the EU remains a politically highly charged issue. The difficulties that the UK Presidency of the EU had in formally initiating the opening negotiations in the autumn of 2005, illustrates the controversy attached to possible Turkish accession. John Redmond explores in this issue the contours of the European debate on Turkey and highlights the deep controversy that currently attaches to its possible membership. As Redmond illustrates, Turkey’s accession not only raises a range of issues for the EU and its member states about the benefits and problems that might accrue from taking on another member state, it also raises a more fundamental set of questions for the future direction of European integration. 228 International Affairs 83: 2, 2007 © 2007 The Author(s). Journal Compilation © 2007 Blackwell Publishing Ltd/The Royal Institute of International Affairs Europe’s next steps Prospective Turkish accession points up questions and challenges that the EU needs to address. Turkey also needs to question whether its political system, economy and society are prepared for accession. These issues are explored by Gareth Jenkins, David Shankland and İlter Turan in these pages. Underlying each of the contributions is the question of whether developments and processes within Turkey will make the prospect of Turkish accession more or less likely. İlter Turan examines the cleavages that are current within Turkish politics and the underlying instability of the political system. A key element in the history of Turkey’s politics and one that is still an unreconciled aspect of today’s Turkish politics and society is the role of the military as examined by Gareth Jenkins. His analysis of this aspect of Turkish politics and the military’s perception that it is indispensable to the maintenance of secularism in Turkish society raises questions about societal and political developments that are also explored by David Shankland. Shankland examines the place of Islam in Turkish politics in the context of the forthcoming presidential election in May 2007 and provides further examination of the themes discussed by Turan. The external implications of Turkey’s recent domestic developments are discussed by Philip Robins in his examination of the country’s foreign policy. Robins illustrates the extent to which the tensions within Turkish politics and society have had an impact on its foreign relations. Turkey’s accession to the EU is a key component of the analysis. The article also stimulates thinking as to whether as a prospective member of the EU Turkey’s evolving wider foreign policy orientation represents an opportunity or a challenge for the EU as it develops its own foreign security and defence policies. Europe’s place in the world The extent to which the EU is still grappling with an appropriate set of concepts to guide its foreign and security policy is discussed by Mary Kaldor, Mary Martin and Sabine Selchow. The absence of a common language and set of principles to guide the EU’s Common Foreign and Security Policy and the European Security and Defence Policy remains a key challenge. Kaldor, Martin and Selchow advance the case of human security as the basis upon which to build a common foreign and security policy for the Union that can reconcile the disparate foreign policy traditions and interests of the individual member states. They also raise the important issue of the relationship between analysts of the EU and the influence of such ideas upon the development of the EU’s policies and its policy-making processes. The challenge for scholars European integration has held a fascination for scholars and analysts seeking to explain and to understand its processes. As Ben Rosamond illustrates in his article, 229 International Affairs 83: 2, 2007 © 2007 The Author(s). Journal Compilation © 2007 Blackwell Publishing Ltd/The Royal Institute of International Affairs Richard G. Whitman there has been a constant, fertile interrelationship between a continuing integration process and scholars’ attempts to comprehend the basis of its functioning. Over the past 50 years European integration has represented a challenge not only for politicians but also for those others who attempt to deepen understanding and explanation of its functioning and development. Debate and speculation about the extent and the final form of European integration have been a constant characteristic of this process across the last half century and, as this issue of International Affairs demonstrates, they look set to remain the condition for analysis and scholarship in the future. 230 International Affairs 83: 2, 2007 © 2007 The Author(s). Journal Compilation © 2007 Blackwell Publishing Ltd/The Royal Institute of International Affairs