by: Professor Laurens Jan Brinkhorst
 Prof. Mr L.J. Brinkhorst: ‘The future of Europe will benefit from higher priority for military mean |
The three agenda items for the future of Europe. Firstly, more effective use of, and also greater priority for, military means. Secondly, a reduction of the democratic deficit, and thirdly better collaboration between national states and the European Community.
The European Community poses no threat to the individual European countries, but is a necessary condition for their survival, says the Leiden Professor of International and European Law and Governance. Over the past fifty years, the EU has given Europe a new structure. With it, the sovereignty – the decision-making autonomy – of the national states has become an out-dated concept. It has been replaced by mutual dependence, co-sovereignty. This has momentous consequences. The Netherlands, too, has to re-evaluate its policy: a cultural reversal is needed. It is vital to develop a cohesive vision on the functioning of the EU. In his inaugural lecture, Brinkhorst formulates three agenda items for Europe’s future.
The EU and the world
The most important tasks and challenges within the EU are located at an external level according to Brinkhorst. We have put fifty years of effort into the internal reorganisation of the EU. Now we have to develop a common strategic vision of the new threats in the world. These threats are less visible compared to those of the Cold War, but are no less present. The performance of the EU on this issue is considerably below par. Within a European setting it is important to pay more attention to active efforts, but also to prioritise military means. Only then can the ambition of the EU to contribute effectively to greater peace and security in the world be achieved.
Reduction of the democratic deficit
The lack of democratic legitimisation is an important reason for the inadequate involvement of European citizens. European elections are still secondary to national elections. This will change when electoral lists with European registered candidates are introduced. The negative result of the referendum on the European constitution in 2005 was partially caused by the negative attitude of national governments. More and better communication on Europe is needed, but it does not solve the problem of the democratic deficit. In order to solve this problem, a political battle about policy at European level will have to be fought.
Better cooperation between national states and the EU
European interests are best served by being better embedded in European policy within the national establishment. The mechanism of prejudicial procedure constitutes the best and oldest example of such collaboration. The Court of Justice ensures a uniform interpretation of European law based on requests for clarification made by national lawyers in actual disputes.
Other examples of European collaboration are the networks of national competition authorities and the work of the European Auditor’s Office. The latter checks the receipts and expenditure of the EU. But far more collaboration is possible and needed. The supervision of the telecommunication and energy sector and the financial sector would be much more effective if it were handled in a European context. And European crime benefits from the fact that the police and the law are only able to operate in their own local territories.
Source: Leiden University Newsletter (leidenslatest@io.leidenuniv.nl)
Recent Comments