The bigger, weaker, EU?

EU / enlargement
...10 states larger already. The EU covers now most of Europe, Western and Eastern, with a significant gap in the Balkans that's supposed to be filled in somewhat by 2007 and, ideally, soon afterwards to reunite Yugoslavia within its borders. This should be a cause of celebration and the picture offered is one of joy across the continent… However, while theoretically this signifies strength, in reality it might be a harbringer of trouble...

The EU was and remains an undemocratic mess, run by a series of bodies decreasingly legitimized by direct public vote and accountability. Much of its economic policy is presented as the fiat of some “well-meaning” technocrats, a fait accompli somewhere in Brussels… In the meantime there is no consensus on the broad rules that should unify the EU’s 15, much less the 25. The “European constitution”, presented this past summer to a largely indifferent populace, is far from the sort of visionary document required for such a task. With major unresolved issues and a multitude of financial worries, the EU commits itself to a great leap forward by accepting close to 70 million new citizens, mostly from the East...

But is this a real accession? The Framework subsidies that assured that funding and support of the poorest of Europe’s regions, will be significantly less generous for the 10 new members, while freedom of movement and work inside Europe is being deferred for a later date, making this pretty much a mock enlargement. It would seem more managable if instead of taking in 10 new members (among which Poland at ~60% of Greece’s - the EU’s poorest country - GDP per capita and with a population of 38 million) it would take in 2-4: the Czech Republic, Slovenia, Cyprus and Malta, the richest of the candidate countries, and give them full membership and full financial support, while helping every way possible (with a special trade relationship and even indirect funds) the other countries to reach a preset minimum financial standard. As things stand, there is bound to be huge disappointment at the EU from much of the new member countries’ populations, which will see their sovereignty curtailed with little or nothing in return…

If the EU is ever to become a democratic, functional supranational entity, it seems to me that the only road is by moving to a closer, federal or confederate union. Any other option would perpetuate Europe’s “Democratic deficit” and lead to even weaker accountability of the governing elites around Europe (which hide behind the EU every time they try to pass an unpopular law). Allowing countries in without deciding on a basic plan and the corresponding commitments that would build such a federal entity is, really, a way to sabotage such a prospect… Increasingly it seems likely that a core of European nations (the Euro-zone or an even narrower set of countries) might move on to the creation of a single confederation of European countries that would function as the de facto leader of an EU relegated to the status of mere trading block, slowly allowing in any country that is interested and prepared to join the confederation. Otherwise the EU risks reverting to a mere trading block as a whole - and a rather undemocratic one at that…