 |
|
MrBaggins
|
|
So that Saudi Arabia can collapse, oil prices sky rocket, and US industry get hit with higher oil prices, right?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Spiffor
|
 |
CPA - Evil Clone brigade
Nov 2001 time: 06:25
|
|
quote: Originally posted by DanS
Unlike old projects which have been initiated by individual countries, this convention is truly a communautary/supranational undertaking.
Spiffor: OK, I guess this is the crux of my questions. Since the EU recently added a second tier and third tier countries, it should become increasingly more difficult for France and Germany to initiate EU policies on their own in any forum. |
In the European institutions, the role of the French-German ticket has been lengthy debated (when I worked in the European parliament, I heard my dear French-German friendship was deemed kitsch by most people there).
France and Germany had to renew their ticket to lose this reputation of backwardness. It is important to notice that the agreement on Iraq is nothing more than a spectacular element of the 40th aniversary of the Elysée Treaty (many other projects have been announced, and most of them will be much more important in the long run than the anti-war barking)
If supranational institutions become more important than states, France and Germany will lose their outstanding role in Europe, and they'll lose many interests, as well as other big countries.
To avoid this, France and Germany must counter the monopoly of the Constitutional Convention on matters regarding the future of Europe (the Convention deals with all matters reguarding the future, not only the constitution ; I call it "Constitutional Convention" for practicality). And who's better than the old motor of Europe to argue against the new one ?
Well, that is only my analysis, but it seems reasonable.
quote: But why would Germany and France invite this analysis upon themselves? The analysis would show that supranational institutions are the only way to go for the EU. Basically, I'm saying that they should have consulted more widely before deciding to stab the US in the back. |
We on Apolyton are discussing this matter now because of the joint anti-war declaration. But the ruling elites of Europe are aware of this for a long time, and the national vs. supranational debate haunts European Institutions for decades. Most countries aren't ready to embrace a supranational Europe yet, especially the ones joining : they consented heavy losses of sovereignity in the recent past already, and they aren't prone to lose even more.
I agree they should have consulted more before "stabbing you in the back" (well, I don't think the expression is appropriate, since France's and Germany's hostility to war was well-known for quite some time), and it looks like a rushed decision to fit the 40th aniversary. Maybe they thought other European countries would follow the lead happily, to please their population ? I just love it when Chirac is gaffing 
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Spiffor
|
 |
CPA - Evil Clone brigade
Nov 2001 time: 06:25
|
|
DanS :
Included in the package were closer cooperation between the government of both countries (a German advisor in the French cabinet, and vice-versa), the project of giving every citizen of France and germany the double nationality, and the will to give a new direction to Europe (no more details has been told in TV news here)
I understand you are pretty much lost with the Convention, the Council, the Parliament etc. I needed a year of lectures to understand something myself But to sum up :
The European Convention is a gathering of many people from governments, parliaments, civil society etc. whose job is to discuss the future of Europe. They have not been elected by the people to do this job, and they have no actual decision power (I mean, their conclusions are not binding for Europe). They started about a year ago, and they should finish in June. It is highly likely that most of their suggestions will be accepted in the end. In European Institutions, the Convention is considered as the future answer to the biggest problem of the EU : lack of vision.
In short, the convention has been charged to give a vision to Europe, which hadn't any since it was decided to make the common money. It replaces the States in their traditional role of giving a direction to the Union.
EDIT : In its current shape, EU gives much more power to individual States than to suprnational institutions. Many important EU decisions give much leeway to the States in the way they apply them, as long as results are noted, and the most important decisions are directly taken by direct negociation between governments, rather than by suprnational institutions.
Basically, EU decisions have 3 core actors :
- the European Commission is made of technocrats and unelected personnel. Its main purpose is to draft new projects within EU abilities (for example, to draft a new policy on salmon fishing). Only the Commission can draft European decisions.
- the Council of the European union gathers people from national ministries. They tweak the texts drafted by the Commission so that they match their State's interests.
- The European Parliament has the power to agree, disagree, or amend the text already tweaked by the Council. In most cases, the Parliament's advice is only consultative, but sometimes, a parliamentary NO blocks completely the text. Since European institutions love to compromise, such an extreme situation is extremely rare, and the Parliament ends up tweaking the text again.
In short, the Council (which represents the interests of individual nations) is the most powerful actors among the 3, and the Parliament the least powerful.
Last edited by Spiffor on 31-01-2003 at 22:32
|
|
|  |
 |
|
HershOstropoler
|
|
"Then it follows that why should we pay particular attention to France and Germany? They're no more or less than other EU members."
So far we haven't supranationalized foreign policy. We have done that with trade policy, and it works the way you describe there.
"The success of this policy relative to other anti-war policies."
I do not think any policy short of kicking the US out of europe would have worked.
"although I wonder why they are choosing to devalue their SC seat."
They aren't. They are just taking that risk.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
notice the mugshots
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
the signers did not follow normal procedures and stabbed a knife in the back of the EU, seriously undermining the quest for a common foreign policy line.
thats what bisbehaving children do, not countries which have committed themselves to an institution.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
au contraire France and Germany and ALL the others had already agreed on the principles.
the gang of 8 made a maverick move which is like a firework.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
and was outside the institutions unlike to what others did.
thats why it has the worth of a toilet paper
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:25. Apolyton Time is 00:25. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|