5th October 2022
You would not think that that Europe wants more political organisations: there is the European Union and the Council of Europe and the European Free Trade Association and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe and so on.
But there is now to be a new one: the European Political Community, which is to meet in Prague later this month.
When I heard this name, it seemed familiar.
This is because there was once another proposal for a European Political Community at the same time as the European Coal and Steel Community (which preceded the European Economic Community) and the aborted European Defence Community (which was rejected by the French).
You will see the European Political Community of 1952 was a grand and ambitious federalist proposal, but it never got off the planning desk after the failure of the European Defence Community.
The ideas which were behind it however became part of the European Economic Community and then the European Union.
Seventy years later the same name is now being used for what appears to be a purely intergovernmental exercise, with no shared institutions.
This is a good thing: one forum for all European countries is a talking-shop which is well worth having, without courts and commissions and treaty obligations.
And, rather wonderfully, it is going to be covered by Eurovision – showing that entity has a role beyond song contests.
The European Union should never be equated with “Europe”.
They are not the same.
The European Union comprises 27 of (about) 50 European countries – just over half.
This new organisation is a boon for genuine Europeanism.
Let us hope that it is more successful than its 1952 incarnation.
***
Comments Policy
This blog enjoys a high standard of comments, many of which are better and more interesting than the posts.
Comments are welcome, but they are pre-moderated and comments will not be published if irksome.
The comments policy is here.
There are very many European organizations which are nothing to do with the European Union (and to which the UK still belongs,, in spite of Brexit). It’s always best to talk. So this sounds encouraging to me.
Always enjoy reading your blog but I am puzzled by the reference to this new talking shop and ” genuine Europeanism”. It seems to be evidence of anglocentric wishful thinking. The plain fact is the European Union IS Europe, politically speaking – however hard it is for Brexit UK to accept. I am glad the UK is taking part in this, at least, but it’s no substitute for actually being a fully committed member of the European community, which would mean rejoining the EU.
I see two problems with conflating Europe and the EU. First, it undermines the development of pan-European security solutions, independent of NATO. In my view such a development is necessary as the U.S. pivots to the Indo-Pacific. The U.S. cannot sustain a Cold-War style forward deployment in Europe whilst also building its forward deployment in the Indo-Pacific in the way it intends. For Europe’s sake the UK has to be a part of pan-European security solutions because of its long-standing commitment to maintaining a strong military, mature military industrial sector and unique (in a European context, of course) military assets. The UK being absent of EU structures means there does need to be a substitute for the EU and UK to work together on security issues. This forum has the opportunity to become that structure.
Second, as the blog suggests, the conflation of Europe and the EU will limit the ability of the EU to become Europe. This is because working within EU structures naturally freezes out non-EU states as has been demonstrated by the frustration of Balkan states not being able to achieve a pan-European response to the energy crisis. The Western Balkans cannot be considered a political irrelevance, not least because of the geographical reality that the region is very much a part of Europe. Hubris in respect of the Western Balkans will lead to a break being put on EU enlargement in the region which will weaken the project to truly turn the EU into Europe.
I too am glad that the UK is attending the first EPC meeting – It’s interesting that a key condition of attendance was that the European Commission isn’t formally represented and that the UK is hosting the second meeting.
They say the devil is in the detail – I guess much depends on its remit/Terms of
Reference – be interesting to see the difference between Nato/G7 too along with their alignment.
Maybe too, tectonic events such as Covid, Ukraine War will allow the ‘talking shop ‘ to enable useful discussions /option’s of joint interest to be aired & solutions proposed?
Mrs van der Layen is there, according to media reports.
The meeting will be attended by the 27 member states of the Eu plus 17 other European states plus the Eu Commission and Council .
The agenda starts with a round table discussion then goes into bilateral discussions with its 46 participants !
This is all to happen within a two day cycle possibly ending in a Press Conference alongside a photoshoot.
Macron original suggestion was to help countries who were seeking Eu membership speed matters along possibly leading to tiered membership. Here the big participants are Turkey and Ukraine, the smaller ones Albania and Moldova.
True the Uk is not the only attendee not seeking Eu membership but it is by far the biggest player amongst the 17 outliers
A run on sterling is not just a risk to the Uk but the Eurozone too. Bilateral discussions on this important topic are surely better dealt with by a full one on one Summit between the Uk and Eu ?
This week’s meeting would be more likely to make progress on Eu integration if limited to the two Eu Commissions and those European States seeking Eu membership.
I followed your Eurovision link and found this ;-
“Host TV/EBU will offer bookable fully equipped live standup positions connected to the Eurovision network.”
Not just songs, then.
Thanks David Allen…
This is a nice succinct piece. I am always surprised how little people understand what Europe is and what the European Union isn’t.
I am in a fortunate position that my job and studies have given me a deeper understanding of this personally and I do try to spread the word when I get the chance.
It also helps that I live in Brussels and have a mixture of friends from within and without the EU.
These e-mails and ones about Brussels political gossip help me start the day :-)
Cheers, Estelle
You mention – in your opening alphabet soup of European organisations – the Council of Europe, now 46 European nations (after Russia was recently expelled for its aggression against Ukraine).
In theory, this body already provides the “one forum for all European countries” and talking-shop you approve of – and it, too, is a purely inter-governmental organisation, ie. the governments decide everything together, with no sovereignty-sapping “supra-national” bodies such as the EU has.
It’s true that there is a parliamentary arm, and of course a judicial arm, the European Court of Human Rights – but these bodies operate under the collective executive authority of the member states’ governments.
The Council of Europe is also, incidentally, as “British” as it gets, being essentially Churchill’s brain-child (he came up with the name in 1943, pushed hard for it in the years after the war, and hailed its arrival in 1949). The UK continues to be a member of the Council of Europe after Brexit – and, despite all the Conservative Party’s domestic grumbling about the ECHR – officially continues to profess its full support for the values and aims of the organisation (spelled out in the statute as human rights, democracy and the rule of law).
I note from earlier posts that, paradoxically, around 46 European nations are due to take part in the preliminary discussion for the “European Political Community” – exactly the number of members of the 70-year-old Council of Europe.
All of which begs the question… what could a new “European Political Community” achieve that the Council of Europe (perhaps with some fresh impetus and a few tweaks here and there) could not?
I guess UK decided that being on the inside of the tent was preferable. At least we can provide some contrast for those considering joining the EU.