GOLD MERCURY INTERNATIONAL Global Governance Policy Series: Citizens’ Perception of EU Identity
Citizens’ Perception of EU Identity GLOBAL GOVERNANCE POLICY SERIES
22 MINUTES
Keywords: EU vision> EU future> citizens’ perception> EU identity> EU citizenship> globalisation> branding> The Euro> nation states> EU members states> EU enlargement> Turkey> EU debate> Lisbon Treaty> Maastricht Treaty> European culture> EU status> EU development.
GOLD MERCURY INTERNATIONAL Global Governance Policy Series: Citizens’ Perception of EU Identity
Creating a Vision of Europe Project EU citizens are not excited, not emotionally involved, but bored, despondent and uninspired by the union’s institutionalism. Is there a shared vision for Europeans, a European identity? European citizens are or the most part disenfranchised and distant from the overall EU project. Having successfully accomplished several goals such as preserving peace, increasing human rights, and solidifying democracy, the now larger EU is in need of a vision and brand that clearly communicates its future role, purpose and value to its citizens. A vision that connects with the needs and requirements of the European and global civil society and responds to the challenges facing a globalised world. GOLD MERCURY EU PROJECT SERIES
aims to analyse and create the basis for a larger debate about Europe, the EU and its future vision and identity. Following the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty, this series aims to reveal the often underestimated issues that need to be taken into account to start a constructive debate about the future of the EU which includes creating a future EU identity and brand. By analysing the current citizens’ perception of Europe, this series will include: an exploration of the meaning and significance of EU identity today, and an analysis of current citizens’ perception of EU. It showcases what the EU has done in the past and what it is doing now to create a European identity. This series aims to present a new framework to understand the complexity that lies behind the EU identity, suggesting new standards to start a constructive debate on EU citizenship and EU identity and drawing on new insights regarding the current situation of EU identity. The EU PROJECT SERIES shines a new spotlight and revitalizes the debate on the EU’s vision and future, suggesting new grounds and parameters to build a fresh paradigm for the EU to clarify its role on the world stage.
GOLD MERCURY INTERNATIONAL Global Governance Policy Series: Citizens’ Perception of EU Identity
Introduction The EU is a political, social and cultural reality and has a daily impact on the life of the citizens within its member states. Yet owing to the complicated way in which the EU came about, it is difficult to identify the constituent parts of an EU identity and what its influence, as an idea, is on the day to day life of citizens. This article considers the nature of an EU identity — why it is so difficult to isolate, what its key factors are and why it is of such significance. It is split into three sections. The first section is a consideration of the problems within the debate of an EU identity, conceiving that the difficulty in considering an EU identity stems largely from the discrepancies and difficulties in tracing what the EU is, in addition to the difficulty in isolating reference points in light of the speed and complexity of developments in both the model itself, as well as background developments that have allowed and facilitated its current manifestation. The second section argues that, following on from the issues of categorisation there is such a thing as an EU identity, and considers what this identity looks like as a form in itself, as well as compared to other types of identity. In addition, this section considers the significance of this identity in terms of how it sheds light on the development of the EU project itself, and what it can tell us about the developing nature of identity-formation within the EU. The third section considers the role the EU itself has played in shaping this identity.
GOLD MERCURY INTERNATIONAL Global Governance Policy Series: Citizens’ Perception of EU Identity
Problems Isolating EU Identity When considering citizens’ perception of EU identity it is easy to assume that there is one unified entity that is being considered, that is to say, an idea or set of easily isolated ideas that are then considered in synergy with an individual’s perceptions. This is not the case. The EU itself, as well as its development and the background to its development are very confusing concepts, impacting different people in different ways.
Identity is an umbrella term used throughout the social sciences to describe a person’s conception and expression of their individuality or group affiliations (such as national identity and cultural identity).
GOLD MERCURY INTERNATIONAL Global Governance Policy Series: Citizens’ Perception of EU Identity
The EU
Maximilian Carl Emil “Max” Weber (1864 – 1920) was a German sociologist and political economist, who profoundly influenced social theory, social research, and the remit of sociology itself. Weber’s major works dealt with the rationalization and so-called “disenchantment” which he associated with the rise of capitalism and modernity.
Charles-Louis de Secondat, baron de La Brède et de Montesquieu 1689-1755, was a French social commentator and political thinker who lived during the Era of the Enlightenment. He is famous for his articulation of the theory of separation
Identity is a difficult thing to consider under any circumstances and when considering the EU or its goals there are certain discrepancies in message and theory that make its philosophical synergy with an identity difficult to consider. Firstly, it is not always clear exactly what the EU is or is trying to be. In this respect the relationship between the EU and European culture is difficult to understand. There is arguably an existing identity among certain groups as regards European culture, but this does not mean that these same groups would subscribe to an EU identity. This is relatively central to an understanding of what the EU is trying to be and to the question of whether it is and should be an overarching political entity along Weberian lines or a more culturally based entity along Montesquian lines. On the one hand, it now plays a role in the development of culture across Europe, is involved in promoting pan-European culture and has a clearly recognisable set of cultural symbols such as a flag and an anthem. On the other hand, with reference to its treaty mandates, it has firm legal and economic emphasis and legitimacy questions are thrown up by a democratic system propagating its own cultural justification. Why it should be playing this role and exactly the purposes of it are not always so clear. Similarly, the fact that the EU began as an economic community compared to the political community it has become over the past few decades, creates the same confusion as to its purpose and nature. Historically, the economic beginnings were a fast and efficient move toward unification and peace in Europe, and unquestionably in a post-war Europe there were actors who would have advocated further unification. However the metamorphosis and expansion of these communities into the EU and the momentum the development process has gained, has arguably outpaced the elucidation of underlying principles and philosophies. Thus questions such as ‘where are the boundaries of the EU’ or ‘who or what is a European’ become increasingly hard to answer and this complicates consideration of an EU identity. of powers, taken for granted in modern discussions of government and implemented in many constitutions throughout the world. He was largely responsible for the popularisation of the terms feudalism and Byzantine Empire.
GOLD MERCURY INTERNATIONAL Global Governance Policy Series: Citizens’ Perception of EU Identity
On a more contemporary level, the above issue manifests itself in the fact that there are different strands in the interpretation of the direction of the EU, all of which function simultaneously and often contradictorily. Firstly, the development of the EU can be seen to have gone too far – that the devolution of power away from state level should stop and even be reversed. Secondly, the development of the EU can be couched in terms of the potential for the EU to become an overarching system dedicated to the values of Human Rights and democracy and thus become a more complete system that has a foundation of values and an aim. Finally, its development can be seen as nothing more than a means toward European economic progression and a means for the development of European power. These different interpretations all lead to very different conclusions and very different opinions regarding the purposes and nature of the EU (and even to the definition of citizenship in the EU), yet their simultaneous traces can be seen across the activities of the EU and the European project. “Would this be it? Could we keep always redesigning and compiling our visions for Europe? If the symbol was just the form, that could be freely gathered? Everyone would recognise that it is the symbol of Europe – stripped down to a blue surface and stars – how ever one would assemble the stars on the surface.
Embracing unity in diversity, the design invites views and revisioning, instead of offering a fixed model.” Extracted from the virtual site for the EU memorial project.
GOLD MERCURY INTERNATIONAL Global Governance Policy Series: Citizens’ Perception of EU Identity
Background Developments
Globalisation describes a process by which regional economies, societies, and cultures have become integrated through a globe-spanning network of communication and trade. Globalisation is usually recognised as being driven by a combination of economic, technological, sociocultural, political, and biological factors.
A similar lack of clarity in considering EU identity arises when one considers the background against which the EU is developing and the incredibly complex processes through which the nature of the EU is defined on a larger scale. The speed and impact of globalisation for instance has undoubtedly given rise to certain paradigms that aligned with the expansion and aspects of the supranational EU project. One example is the relative decline in the power and status of the state as the main unit of international reference which clearly reflects an ability to enlarge and expand spheres of influence on the EU level. Developments on such a scale are very difficult to reference to an individual’s own identity and yet play a key role in understanding the function, existence and direction of the current EU. This feeds directly into a problem of categorisation. When one speaks of an EU identity, one must have certain reference points as to what that identity is and how it works. Due to the speed of its development, its constant change and the vast forces that have played a role in shaping the EU, points of reference are very fluid and there has been arguably little time to create anything more solid. This problem is compounded by the fact that an EU identity (if such a thing exists) when considered in light of the unique nature of the EU itself would not necessarily resemble anything we have previously known. Thus whilst the EU itself often appears to use national identity reference points as a starting point to identify itself, these are inadequate and inevitably cause further confusion in categorisation. This filters down to an individual level and creates difficulty in pinpointing whether or why one identifies with this new identity idea as well as bringing up an inevitable tension between the idea, how it is being portrayed and its reality.
GOLD MERCURY INTERNATIONAL Global Governance Policy Series: Citizens’ Perception of EU Identity
State Level
Euroscepticism is a general term used to describe criticism of the European Union (EU), and opposition to the process of European integration. Traditionally, the main source of euroscepticism has been the notion that integration weakens the nation state. Other views occasionally seen as eurosceptic include perceptions of the EU being undemocratic or too bureaucratic. A Eurobarometer survey of EU citizens in 2009 showed that support for membership of the EU was lowest in Latvia, the United Kingdom and Hungary.
Reversing the above argument, confusion of what the EU is and where it sits in relation to pre-existing identity markers such as states, makes the idea of an EU identity very difficult to delineate. On the one hand, the states are the foundation points and the ‘keepers’ of the treaties. This means that there can be no EU without the states and therefore no EU identity without state identity, begging the question of where EU identity fits in at all. Alternatively, given certain considerations of the EU as a vehicle for the economic progress of Europe, and other aspects such as the legal systems or the political systems simply as additional and necessary progress vehicles, the idea of an EU identity can seem rather redundant. It has been widely documented that across the various states of the EU there are varying levels of commitment to the project and different perceptions of the purposes and goals of the EU. This makes it difficult to talk about the construction of an EU identity as it means that within the individual states the perception of what an EU identity represents changes along with the cultural and historical specificities of the state and its current association with the EU. In this way, it can be suggested that there can only be a relational identity to the EU based on the specificities of each state. For example, considering German history and the blow to the credibility of German identity suffered as a result of the Second World War, it is hardly surprising that politically and socially there has always been a high synergy with further European integration. The motivating factors behind German recognition and goals for the EU, and therefore key factors in an EU identity formation, are based on different foundations than those of, for example, the UK, for whom the EU and the idea of further European unification is invariably treated with a degree of scepticism.
GOLD MERCURY INTERNATIONAL Global Governance Policy Series: Citizens’ Perception of EU Identity
EU Identity The above issues may make it harder to identify exactly what is meant by an EU identity and certainly points out that its constituent factors probably mean that the idea of EU identity will be different to different people and will change over time. However rather than precluding the existence of an identity at this level, and given the reality of the EU and the importance of its place and development to the member states, these conceptual issues nevertheless lay a framework from which an idea of EU identity is constructed and is iteratively developing. In fact, it could be argued that the fact that such abstract issues in considering EU identity can be raised and examined is evidence in itself that a form of EU identity must be present.
HR and Democracy Sovereignty Citizenship
Culture EU Budget EU systems
National Identity Enlargement Economics
Foreign Policy Defence
10 GOLD MERCURY INTERNATIONAL Global Governance Policy Series: Citizens’ Perception of EU Identity
What Does this Identity Look like When one considers the data on EU identity against this backdrop it becomes increasingly clear that an EU identity is under construction. However identity and the strength of this identity is geographically specific. For example, the Eurobarometer survey results consistently show a difference in answers and consideration of meaning between states. This approach does lack philosophical consistency and factual cogency. For example, whilst considering EU identity depending on place, time and person this identity can encompass many of the above conflicting philosophical ideas related to the direction, principles and status of the EU. Further, the idea of what EU identity might consist of is equally confused, with people having a tendency to mix up a European cultural identity and an affinity with values embodied by other European organisations such as the Council of Europe (an explicitly culturally based organisation consisting of far more states) for an EU identity.
11 GOLD MERCURY INTERNATIONAL Global Governance Policy Series: Citizens’ Perception of EU Identity
Thus this identity arguably points to a feeling of belonging, but is accompanied by the uncertainty of exactly what to. Probably the core of this identity is formed by the effects and the knowledge of 60 years of the development of the EU along with the clear presence of being within a political and economic system. This is unsurprising in light of the nature of the rights granted and how they compare and fit in certain ways with pre-existing identity moulds. For example, when one considers the fact that individuals as members of the EU have the right to vote in EU elections, have the ability to rely on rights granted to them on the basis of their supplementary EU citizenship, or that the majority of individuals deal daily in the Euro; it is only natural to assume that an identity of forms would grow around the central pillars of the entity. However, tangential developments and their implications and connections, such as how the goals of the original project relate to the contemporary reality, or quite where the boundaries of the EU as an entity end and where cultural similarities begin, or indeed if these cultural similarities exist (a point which will be dealt with later) confuse the nature of the identity, against its already confusing background.
12 GOLD MERCURY INTERNATIONAL Global Governance Policy Series: Citizens’ Perception of EU Identity
Nature of the Identity Most interesting perhaps is the fact that the development of this new identity does not seem to have superseded or replaced other identities. In all surveys, the idea of EU identity co-exists with the continued idea of national identity. Indeed in most cases, it seems clear that when one identity is demanded, it is that of the state with which people most readily associate. In this sense, it has been suggested that the identities form a model of identity which can be referred to as multi-layered or hybrid. Considered in terms of the above framework which helps construct EU identity and its core as an economic and political union conveying its own system of rights and obligations, and the fact that these considerations occur and co-exist with similar types of obligation at national level, it is unsurprising that the identities co-exist. This form of multi-layered identity mimics the development of a system of multi-layered governance.
The barcode, a proposal for a new European Flag, seeks to unite the flags of the EU member countries into a single, colourful symbol into which new Member States of the EU can be added without space constraints. Originally, the barcode displayed 15 EU countries. In 2004, the symbol was adapted to include the ten new Member States.
This recognition of multiple layers of identity also reflects trends of multiple levels of belonging and the developments of the individualistic principles of liberal democracy. For example, one can look at the phenomenon of multiculturalism within the EU states themselves and the fact that the EU itself is a collection of various cultures. In the development of a sustainable identity format, resonating with the principles of individual rights at any level in a contemporary EU state, or at EU level, there must be the possibility for the expression of varied levels of self-identity. Expressed at the level of association with political entities, this may manifest itself in a recognition of simultaneous EU and national identities (as well as perhaps even identities at a regional, or even more local level), whilst on other levels it may allow other types of identification markers to exist simultaneously — Indian and European for example. As the EU itself is a result of wider forces, one can see their reflection in the nature of the multi-layered identity at EU level. Put rather well, “the nation-state has been ‘hollowed out’ with power moving ‘up’ to the European Union, ‘down’ to the local and regional level and ‘out’ to inter-regional networks”. One can take this trend further and consider the emergence of a global identity which is a trend that has already been detected in many of the Eurobarometer surveys.
13 GOLD MERCURY INTERNATIONAL Global Governance Policy Series: Citizens’ Perception of EU Identity
Significance and Development of this Identity With the identification of the existence of this identity it can be suggested that its development will lead (in a constructivist sense) to an ability to consider more solidly some of the current problems associated with its pinpointing. At an EU level, as time passes and dialogues continue on the subject, the continued interaction of the fluid parts of an identity will develop their own truths and reference points, until the continued development of an EU identity iteratively narrows down the range of strands of its development.
The European Constitution, Towards the end of the 20th century, it became clear for a large number of European leaders that the EU required a re-foundation and renovation. From an initial agenda that included the distribution of competencies, simplification and the incorporation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, the Convention on the Future of Europe produced a fully-fledged proposal for a Constitution or Constitutional Treaty for Europe. Italian and Irish Presidencies had led the negotiation and final approval of this document. On 29 October 2004, the Heads
Thus not only will the development of an EU identity play a role in the development of the EU project through its interaction and advancement, but a consideration of this identity allows insight into aspects of the evolution of the EU project. Firstly, the way identity seems to be perceived by the EU population suggests that the EU will not be able to develop as an entity for the sole development of the economy and power of Europe. This is firmly demonstrated by the perception of the mixture of the realities and foundations of the EU and the perceived links it has developed with culture and value sets. Nor will it, considering the background to its development as well as the emergence of an identity, cease its expansion and return areas of competence to member states. Thus while there are three strands in the development of the EU at the moment, it would seem logical when considering the shape of the EU identity that the idea of the EU, whilst not losing its economic basis will become ever more closely tied in with the ideas of democracy and human rights. On a wider scale this identity is a significant advancement as it represents part of a new form of contemporary identification. In theory, it is a far more dynamic and individual identity than that attached only to the state. Not only does this represent an element in the ‘hollowing out’ of the nation state as an entity, it also suggests that the idea of ethnicity, politics and territorial of State or Government of the 25 Member States and the 3 candidate countries signed the Treaty. It was later ratified by 18 member states, which included referendums endorsing it in Spain and Luxembourg. However the rejection of the document
by French and Dutch voters in May and June 2005 brought the ratification process to an end. Following a period of reflection, the Treaty of Lisbon was created to replace the Constitutional Treaty which entered into force on 1 December 2009.
14 GOLD MERCURY INTERNATIONAL Global Governance Policy Series: Citizens’ Perception of EU Identity
boundaries, wrapped up as one, may be becoming outdated (or at least less applicable) in the contemporary brand of identity. Whilst it is true that there is often an element of common cultural reference implied in an EU identity, it is not inconceivable that considering the multi-cultural nature of the EU and the core of the EU identity being built around liberal democratic political ideals, that this culture is far closer to that of an adherence to a shared set of political ideals and the rights that go with them than its predecessor state identities. Should this be the case it would lead to a far more inclusive brand of identity on an international scale than has hitherto been the case.
How Positions May Manifest in Relation to Key Issues Pro Europe
Anti Europe
Human Rights and Democracy
It makes sense to have a unified direction. Values can be better supported and developed externally.
Social Organisation and the promotion of Human Rights are better dealt with on a state level where they can be culturally specific. The EU is undemocratic.
Sovereignty
The EU is no threat to the state or sovereignty but can work alongside states to communal benefit.
The EU’s expansion is a threat to national and cultural sovereignty.
Citizenship
Citizenship bestows rights on all inclusively and provides a safety mechanism for the individual. Multilayered citizenship is a model for the Future.
EU citizenship does not mean anything. It is an attempt to usurp national culture.
National Identity
EU identity forms a complimentary layer of identity following more general patterns of inclusiveness and identity creations.
There is no EU identity. National Identity is a key part of self-identity and is filed down by EU intrusion.
Enlargement
Makes sense in terms of socialising values in more places. Makes economic and political sense to the union.
The EU has no basis for enlargement other than gathering power unto itself. The current Union has enough problems that need to be dealt with. Enlargement costs more than it is worth.
Economics
EU economics creates massive revenue and job opportunities. A unified EU is externally more powerful. The EU is worth it.
The EU loses developed countries’ money in misguided projects in poorer countries. The costs outweigh the benefits in the EU’s impracticable and unworkable ‘one size fits all’ policies.
EU Budget
The cost is minimal compared to what is brought in.
The cost is phenomenal and the rewards minimal. Money is wasted on bureaucracy.
EU systems
Systems are developing and acclimatising and have achieved incredible things. They are the model for a new age. They are becoming ever more accountable.
The systems are undemocratic and unaccountable to the public. They are cumbersome and ineffective.
Foreign Policy
A combined foreign policy allows for far more to be achieved and makes sense in a globalising world.
Foreign policy is the domain of the state and the EU has no business there.
Defence
So much has already been achieved in this area, with other co-operation developing, this makes sense.
Defence is better on a national level. A Communal defence policy is impractical and weakens all.
Culture
The EU can have a great role in cultural promotion. It can help develop both a European culture and will make the constituent cultures richer.
Europe is unifying and simplifying. The EU (regardless of subsidiarity) will rob states of their uniqueness.
15 GOLD MERCURY INTERNATIONAL Global Governance Policy Series: Citizens’ Perception of EU Identity
The role of the EU in the shaping of an EU identity In the same way as one would find it confusing (and perhaps a little contradictory) to talk of a national (democratic) governance hierarchy trying to publicise its own legitimacy and identity, the same could be said to be true of the EU. However as a unique and developing entity, the task of its development has largely gone hand in hand with the justification for its development and as such, one can refer to the EU as having played a role in the creation of the identity in question. Unity in Diversity was adopted as the European Union’s motto in May 4 2000 following a contest called ‘A motto for Europe’. It was selected from entries proposed by school pupils and then accepted by the President of the European Parliament, Nicole Fontaine.
16 GOLD MERCURY INTERNATIONAL Global Governance Policy Series: Citizens’ Perception of EU Identity
Past
“Europe Day” is a celebration of Europe held annually on 9 May. 9 May 1950 was the date of the “Schuman Declaration”, the proposal to pool the French and West German coal and steel industries. This is considered a founding moment for what is now the EU and was adopted as its flag day at the Milan European Council summit in 1985.
In the past there have essentially been three means through which the EU has played a role in the shaping of this identity. Firstly, it has done this culturally (common culture being a key part of identity) since the need for a common culture was recognised and considered in the Adonnino reports in the 1980s. Under this heading can be considered the Delors Commission’s “Working Program for the Creation of a Peoples’ Europe” and efforts such as the creation of symbolism for the EU, such as a flag, an anthem and common EU passport markings and layout. Considering the widespread and easily recognisable nature of these symbols today - especially the flag - this can probably be said to have been relatively successful. The proven influential nature of symbols on identity construction has perhaps been due to the particular resonance with national identity markers, a form of ‘putting a recognisable face to the name’. Other efforts under this heading (although it must be pointed out that they were not all specifically EU projects) included the attempts to give a cultural reality and base to the development of the European project. For example, the use of historical myths relating to Christian heritage, the common political and legal heritage and the tradition of humanism as well as the attempt to fashion ideologies for the European project. These have arguably met with less success, perhaps because of the daily contradictions and theoretical problems of trying to find a common reference point for such a wide ranging project. However, whilst the individual attempts were perhaps not successful, their existence probably equally shows an attempt to categorise and give meaning and understanding to the progression of the project. Indeed such projects continue today, albeit in other more wide ranging guises, and continue to search for common denominators of European identity. Finally, the organisation of academic and social co-operation schemes such as the Erasmus education exchange and linguistic programmes created and continue to create links between different states and to encourage feelings of unity. The European anthem is based on the prelude to “The Ode to Joy”, 4th movement of Ludwig van Beethoven’s Symphony No. 9. Due to the large number of languages in Europe, it is an instrumental version only with the original German lyrics having no official status.
17 GOLD MERCURY INTERNATIONAL Global Governance Policy Series: Citizens’ Perception of EU Identity
The second way in which Europe has impacted on the development of a European identity is more as a side effect of its development as a supranational body and its forging of more links between states rather than an active search for self-legitimation, namely with the creation of a common legal system. Finally, specific to the entity itself and to its political system, the creation of European citizenship with membership rights and requirements, a system as well as enforcement mechanisms have been established. These final two methods essentially meant that citizens were left with the political scaffolding around which to build an identity after the fact.
Main steps in the European constitutional process The Treaty of Paris (1951) created the European Steel and Coal Community (ESCC). The Treaties of Rome (1957) established the European Economic Community (EEC) and the European Atomic Energy Community (EAEC) The Single European Act (1986) introduced measures aimed at achieving an internal market and greater political cooperation. The Maastricht Treaty (1992) established EU citizenship and the European Monetary Union (EMU). The Amsterdam Treaty (1997) introduced measures to reinforce political union and prepare for enlargement towards the East. The Nice Treaty (2001) defined the institutional changes necessary for enlargement. The Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe (2004) seeked to simplify and synthesise previous treaties within a single, clear, foundational document for the EU. The Lisbon Treaty (2007) which after the rejection of the Constitution for Europe modified the existing treaties, enhancing the efficiency of the decision making process and democratic participation in a Union of 27 Member States.
18 GOLD MERCURY INTERNATIONAL Global Governance Policy Series: Citizens’ Perception of EU Identity
Current Efforts
The Culture Programme has been established to enhance the cultural area shared by Europeans, which is based on a common cultural heritage, through the development of cooperation activities among cultural operators from eligible countries, with a view to encouraging the emergence of European citizenship.
The Platform for Intercultural Europe is a network that connects the work of grass-roots practitioners, associations, public bodies and European institutions, forming strong links from practice to policy and back again. In this way it aims to strengthen the work of and support for all those who work towards intercultural dialogue in Europe.
Direct efforts at establishing an EU identity continue. The use of symbolism is becoming ever more widespread, for example the ‘unity in diversity’ motto and attempts to isolate the essence and justification in culture and history. However, they have developed in parallel with the EU and now seem to take into account the reaction to the uncertainty at the expansion of the EU as well as the recognition that the EU cannot simply, on account of its uniqueness, copy the blueprints of national cultural and historic identification (even if they too at one point were deliberately created). Thus they now appear to focus much more on the political unity and links between the peoples of the EU and toward the creation of increasing cultural unity in the future. Part of this development has been extensive creation and funding for research groups and commissions into EU identity and the necessity of its development to the continuation and stability of the EU project. One can look for example at the mandates given out under the ‘Spiritual and Cultural Dimension of Europe’ heading to (amongst other things) deal with the necessity to ‘look for and find new sources of energy in Europe’s common culture’. In this respect, cultural communication programs are continually developed, as can be seen with such EU flagship programs as the ‘Culture Programme’ which funds cultural exchange at an array of levels and with EU funded or created educational initiatives being particularly encouraged. There is also currently a trend within the EU to lock politics and identity closer together through common cultural initiatives and thus align their simultaneous development. One can see this in legislation onwards from the Maastricht Treaty which recognised for the first time the cultural dimension of EU integration and whose ‘culture compatible’ clause suggested that cultural aspects should be taken into account when considering other community policies. This has developed in various legislation and cross border programmes and in 2008 the EU Council passed an act encouraging the co-ordination of culture between states and at the EU level, in reference to EU foreign policy, as well as confirming the role of a cultural element in EU foreign policy. Whilst there is a subsidiarity clause to EU impact in the sphere of culture this does not change the fact that the thought behind the policy sets the foundation for the development of EU impact in wider fields related to identity and culture as the EU develops.
19 GOLD MERCURY INTERNATIONAL Global Governance Policy Series: Citizens’ Perception of EU Identity
153 countries are members of the WTO. All 27 EU member states are individually members of the WTO, but the EU negotiates and acts within the WTO as a single body.
The European Defence Agency was established under a Joint Action of the Council of Ministers on 12 July, 2004, “to support the Member States and the Council in their effort to improve European defence capabilities in the field of crisis management and to support the European Security and Defence Policy as it stands now and develops in the future”.
Finally, as mentioned above, with the further development of the legal and political apparatus of the EU, the EU itself by nature of its continued progression develops the identity attached to it. As its competencies grow and it creates more easily recognisable reference points for an identity, such as those created with the Treaty of Lisbon, an identity becomes more readily recognisable and tangible. This is particularly apparent in EU interaction with outside states, as unity in trade as well as common foreign and security policy and enlargement policy develops. Not only is it possible to identify the emergence of a specific notion of EU identity as put forward by ‘we’ the EU as opposed to ‘they’ who are not, which, after its manifestation in dialogue becomes a part of the reality of the EU’s relationships (at all levels within Europe and in defining the EU as an entity relative to third parties) and which in itself serves to feed back into the creation of an EU identity, but the development of these EU competences to this point have themselves created denser systems and points of reference. Such developments have demanded preferences of certain positions and philosophies over others and as such, make these points ever more solid and more clear in content.
20 GOLD MERCURY INTERNATIONAL Global Governance Policy Series: Citizens’ Perception of EU Identity
Conclusion The complexity and speed of factors pushing the development of the EU as well as the complexity of understanding how, what and why the EU is what it is, make the isolation of an EU identity very difficult. These issues lead to confusion in the consideration of an identity as well as arguably being underlying factors in the argument that there is a democratic deficit in the apparatus. Having said this, the reality and development to date of the EU are facts, and according to evidence, there is a form of EU identity developing. Considering the above issues and the perception of identity of various forms within the EU system, it would seem that it constitutes a new type of multilayered identity, fitting together with the development of multiple layers of governance as well as a multicultural EU, whilst also reflecting background trends which have undoubtedly played a role in its creation, such as globalisation.
21 GOLD MERCURY INTERNATIONAL Global Governance Policy Series: Citizens’ Perception of EU Identity
The development of the EU and its competences will go hand in hand with the development of this identity and over time, many of the above issues will become clearer. However the identity is still in its infancy and this line of argument presupposes that the development of the EU does not pull the tethers of these issues and does not develop out of reach of answers either by developing and expanding too fast or continually along unexpected or untraditional lines. The question of Turkish accession would be a fine example. The difference in roots and culture in Turkey, should accession be granted, may make the issues too complex to answer and risk tearing the strands that are now being built. Likewise, should the project of building an identity be taken up too artificially (for example with too much emphasis being placed on the creation of a common culture by the EU and at the level of the EU) the same thing may happen. If the project were to lose sight of realities and perceptions, the discrepancies could not be ignored.
Dara Hallinan, Research Fellow of Gold Mercury International, contributed to this paper.
Gold Mercury International is an independent global think tank founded in 1961. Our Global Governance Model™ is a uniquely flexible framework to organise world complexity within the 8 major global areas. The model combines public and private approaches to generating policy debate and new thinking in the context
goldmercury.org
of Global Governance and Visionary Leadership. Since our founding in 1961, our commitment to the promotion of peace and dialogue through trade, cooperation and sustainable practices has captured the attention of statesmen, companies, the media and public opinion worldwide. The prestigious Gold
Mercury Awards for Visionary Leadership exemplify ethical, forward-looking and sustainable decision-making. To receive our Publications Catalogue please write to: enquiries@goldmercury.org Subject: Publications Catalogue
22 GOLD MERCURY INTERNATIONAL Global Governance Policy Series: Citizens’ Perception of EU Identity
SOURCES Lectures Bekemans, L., ‘The Idea and Practise of Europe in a Globalising World: Reality and Responsibility’. Lecture at the International Institute for European Education, 1st October 2004. Text available online at http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cache:rIz_5NoRIxYJ:www. cor.europa. eu/COR_cms/ui/ViewDocument.aspx%3Fsiteid%3Ddefault%26cont entID%3D2a27e44b-3459-466e-900d-109772672ca8+The+Idea+and +Practise+of+Europe+in+a+Globalising+World:+Reality+and+Respons ibility&cd=1&hl=de&ct=clnk&gl=de. Statements, Reports, Documents and Treaties ‘The Adonnino Report’. Report to the European Council by the ad hoc Committee On a People’s Europe, 1985, full text available at http://www.docstoc.com/docs/954801/The-Adonnino-ReportReport-to-the-European-Council-by-the-ad-hoc-committee-On-aPeople-s-Europe-A-COM-SN. Reflection Group, ‘The Spiritual and Cultural Dimension of Europe’, 2004, Brussels, European Commission. Full text available online at http://cordis.europa.eu/documents/documentlibrary/104214451EN6.pdf Treaty on European Union (Consolidated Version), Treaty of Maastricht, 7 February 1992, Official Journal of the European Communities C 325/5; 24 December 2002. On the Promotion of Cultural Diversity and Intercultural Dialogue in the External Relations of the Union and its Member States, 2008/C 320/04. “Treaty of Lisbon amending the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty establishing the European Community”, 13 December 2007, 2007/C 306/01.
Burgess, P.J., ‘What’s so European about the European Union: Legitimacy between Institution and Identity’, European Journal of Social Theory, 2002, Vol.5, No.4, pp.467-481. Painter, J., ‘Multi-level Citizenship, Identity and Regions in Contemporary Europe’. Paper presented to an invited colloquium on “The Possibilities of Transnational Democracy”, University of Newcastle, September 1998. Full text available online at http://www.dur.ac.uk/j.m.painter/Multilevel%20citizenship.pdf Fossum, J.E., ‘Identity-politics in the European Union’, Journal of European Integration, 2001, Vol. 23, No.4, pp.373-406. Kohli, M., ‘The Battlegrounds of European Identity’, European Societies, 2000, Vol.2, No.2, pp.113-137. Delgado-Moreira, J.M., ‘Cultural Citizenship and the Creation of European Identity’, Electronic Journal of Sociology, 1997, available at http://sociology.org/content/vol002.003/delgado.html. Paparella, E.L., ‘A Hard Look at the European Union’s Cultural Identity’, 2nd June 2008, available online at http://www.ovimagazine.com/art/3068 Aydin-Duzgit, S., ‘Discursive Construction of European Identity in EU’s Relations with Turkey: The Case of the European Commission’. Paper presented at the ISA’s 50th Annual Convention, 15 Feb 2009, New York. Full text available online at http://www.allacademic.com/ meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/3/1/2/5/9/p312591_index.html Eurobarometer Data and Reports. All data available at http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/index_en.htm For information on EU activities see http://europa.eu/pol/cult/index_en.htm
Articles, Journals, Websites and Papers
Books and Edited Collections
Bruter, M., ‘Winning Hearts and Minds for Europe: The Impact of News and Symbols on Civic and Cultural European Identity’, Comparative Political Studies, 2003, Vol.36, No.10, pp.1148-1179.
Jacobs, D. and Maier R., ‘European Identity Construct: Fact and Fiction’, in M. Gastelaars and A. de Ruijter (Eds.) A United Europe the Quest for a Multifaceted Identity, 1998, Maastricht: Shaker, pp.13-35.
Published in May 2010.