THE FUTURE OF EUROPE OPINION OF ORGANIZATIONS MEMBERING THE EUROPEAN UNION CIVIL COOPERATION COUNCIL

◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙

                                 European Union Civil Cooperation Council

◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙◙

                                                                   THE FUTURE OF EUROPE

   ORGANIZATIONS BELONGING TO THE EUROPEAN UNION CIVIL COOPERATION COUNCIL

                                                                     HIS OPINION

                                                                      DRAFT

The idea of ​​uniting Europe

The idea of ​​uniting Europe is not new, the first attempt was attributed to Károly the Great, but even after the disintegration of the Frankish empire, several smaller and larger empires emerged during the last thousand years. The German-Roman Empire existed for about eight hundred years, but regional collaborations such as the Danish Empire in Scandinavia (13th-15th centuries), the Habsburg Empire in Central Europe, the Lithuanian-Polish Empire in Eastern Europe were also successful. In Europe, the Hanseatic League, or the Kalmar Union. These empires or confederations were able to survive for centuries, until they finally disintegrated due to the weakening of the central power or changes in the interests that made up the confederation. The idea of ​​uniting Europe in the XX. in the 20th century, Count Coudenhove-Kalergi created the Pan-European League in 1929, which popularized the plan of a united Europe, but concrete steps were taken only after the Second World War, when, on the initiative of Jean Monnet and Robert Schuman, the European Coal- and Steel Community, from which the European Economic Community was established in 1957 with the cooperation of six countries within the framework of the Treaty of Rome.

From the Treaty of Rome to the Treaty of Lisbon

The European Economic Community (EEC) established by the Treaty of Rome proved to be very successful, the wounds of the Second World War were quickly healed and the community was able to achieve very dynamic economic growth for two decades. Thinking continued about the possibilities of continuing the integration. In the 1970s, three studies were prepared (Werner, Marjolin and MacDougall reports), which, based on international examples, examined the possibilities of further integration and the introduction of a common currency, primarily from the budgetary point of view. Based on the example of functioning federal states such as the United States of America or the Federal Republic of Germany, it was determined that one of the basic conditions for integration is the creation of a community budget that would adequately support less developed regions. This would require the centralization of 2-3 percent of GDP at a lower level of integration, 5-7 percent in the case of the introduction of a common currency, and 20-25 percent of GDP in the case of full integration. The Marjolin report also added identity and social conditions to this. Such a condition is that the greater part of the population must feel that they belong to the union, and that the ownership of capital must be widely distributed in the territory of the union and that there must be an automatic equalization mechanism in order to mitigate excessive differences in development.

No substantive changes were made to the Treaty of Rome until 1992, when the Maastricht Treaty substantially rewrote the previous treaty, many powers were centralized and, in order to introduce the common currency, the euro, strict budget rules (Maastricht criteria) were prescribed, which had expanded to 12 in the meantime for a member country. The euro was introduced in such a way that not only the recommendations of the studies made in the 1970s were not taken into account, but also the warnings of well-known economists and the relevant economic principles. The result was the indebtedness of the southern member states, the disintegration of the Union into debtor and creditor countries, and a significant reduction in economic growth. However, the problems only became apparent after the international financial crisis that broke out in 2008. In the meantime, efforts to further integrate the Union continued. This was the purpose of the European Convention convened in 2002, which drew up a constitution for the Union, but this was rejected in referendums in two of the founding countries (France and the Netherlands). Despite the will of the people, the European constitution was accepted by the governments of the member countries as the Treaty of Lisbon with some legal modifications. This contract includes the further centralization of powers.

Crisis phenomena of the Union

The economically and socially successful development of the European Economic Community is characterized by the development of the European Union characterized more and more by crises and the unresolved problems that have arisen. Among these problems and crisis phenomena, we consider the following to be the most important.

The "democracy deficit"

The Treaty of Rome created a commercial cooperation (European Economic Community), in which the individual countries retained their independence and sovereignty in most non-commercial matters. After the Maastricht Treaty, however, more and more areas were included in the central decision-making circle, or were transferred from a unanimous decision-making circle to a majority decision-making circle. With this, the individual member states often have to carry out tasks that are not in their interest and disadvantageous for them. All of this was associated with an ideological transformation of the major Western European parties, the result of which was the imposition of unrealistic political or economic requirements on the individual member states. The consequence of this was that in matters of serious concern to some countries (e.g. immigration, climate policy) decisions are taken by bodies (European Parliament, European Commission) that cannot be democratically held accountable for the enforceability of the decisions and the consequences of the decisions, in the same way as democratically elected nation-state governments. The lack of accountability and responsibility for decisions was called the "democracy deficit" during political debates.+

The slowdown of economic growth, the indebtedness of Southern European countries

It is a general economic law that the economic growth of more developed countries slows down, but with the average level of development of the European Union, growth of 2-3 percent per year could potentially be achieved, on the other hand, in the average of the last ten years (2010-2019), the growth is only 1.6 per year % achieved. The reason for the low growth is that due to the intention to fulfill the Maastricht criteria, the majority of countries are forced to pursue austerity policies, which restrains economic growth. In addition, the introduction of the euro and the liberalization of capital operations led to the indebtedness of the less competitive southern European countries and, as a result, to the stagnation of their economic development.

Demographic crisis

The population of the current member states of the European Union grew by 0.5-1.0 percent per year until the 1960s. From the 1960s, however, dramatic changes occurred, during which the total fertility rate decreased from 2.6 to 1.5 in three decades, and then remained at this level until today. The decline in the total fertility rate is a global phenomenon. However, while in developing countries - despite the significant decrease - it remained well above the level of 2.1 necessary to maintain the population, in the developed world, and especially in the EU-27, the ratio of 1.5 is not sufficient to maintain society . The leadership of the union is trying to solve the demographic crisis with immigration. However, the masses of immigrants may necessarily come from Muslim countries and due to their significantly higher total fertility rate than Europeans, Western Europe will have to face the fact that a Muslim population of 70-80 million will develop by the middle of the century, which will lead to the development of societies parallel to social tensions due to the high degree of cultural differences. .

The lack of a "common voice" in the Union's foreign policy

It is a recurring problem that the countries of the union cannot agree, cannot speak "with one voice" on foreign policy issues. The basic principles of the EU's foreign policy are contained in Articles 2, 21 and 23 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU). According to them, the Union's action on the international scene is guided by the principles that inspired its own creation, development and expansion, and which it wishes to promote in the wider world. These are, among others, the principles of democracy, the rule of law, respect for human rights, human dignity, equality and solidarity. With these provisions, the EU practically authorizes itself to intervene in the internal affairs of any third country, especially because the concrete content of these principles is elusive and can be applied arbitrarily. Where and how the intervention should take place depends on the foreign policy interests of individual countries, which can be very different, say in the case of Poland, Germany, France or Spain, to mention only the largest countries. Therefore, despite all efforts in this direction, the Union could not achieve the goal of speaking with one voice on foreign policy issues.

Alternative scenarios for the future of Europe

On the one hand, the above-mentioned crisis phenomena worsen the efficiency of the Union, and on the other hand, they incite continuous tensions between the individual countries. That is why the reform or further development of the cooperation system of the EU countries comes up again and again. In 2017, the European Commission published a White Paper on the future of Europe, in which it outlined five scenarios that included different transitions from the continuation of the current form of cooperation to the creation of a federal state. In fact, the current European leadership is not thinking about alternatives, but aims to create a federal state. However, neither the social nor the economic conditions are met for an actual federation.

The missing conditions for the realization of the federation (United States of Europe).

If we examine real federal states such as the United States, Canada, Argentina, or India, they are characterized by features that the European Union lacks. The most important of these are:

Lack of a common language

Each federal state has a state language that everyone understands. In contrast, almost as many languages ​​are spoken in the Union as there are member states. As a result, the average European citizen simply cannot participate in a pan-European communication space, common issues of the Union cannot be widely discussed at the level of citizens, they do not know the activities and political views of the leaders, they do not know and understand the problems and thinking of other countries. Therefore, the lack of a common language is one of the biggest obstacles to the creation of a democratic, federal state.

Lack of common historical consciousness

Common history and its result, common historical memory, play a decisive role in the cohesive power of an allied state or a united state. According to German historian Jörn Rüsen, if the current integration process is carried out without historical awareness, it will result in a very artificial, soulless Europe. At the same time, the common European historical consciousness cannot be dictated from above, such endeavors are doomed to failure if they are not grounded in the emotional world of the wider public. This is confirmed by a survey conducted by Eurobarometer in the spring of 2018, according to which 90 percent of the population of the European Union feel that they belong exclusively to their own nation, or primarily to their own nation, and only 2 percent feel that they belong exclusively to Europeans and another 6 percent who primarily belong to Europeans and they feel that they belong to their nation only secondarily.

Absence of common foreign policy and geopolitical interests

The foreign and defense policy of a federal state may change slightly over time, but basically it follows from its historical past, geographical location, geopolitical ambitions, and involvement in how it relates to other states, who it considers a friend or a potential enemy. The countries of the European Union border the Atlantic region in the west, Russia and the states of the former Soviet Union in the east, North Africa in the south, and the countries of the Middle East in the east, and the location of which country in this region also determines its foreign policy goals and defense interests. For example, Poland has a completely different perception of the relationship with Russia than, say, Germany or Greece, while the situation in North Africa or the Middle East mainly affects the countries of Southern Europe. Involvement beyond the region (for example, in the Pacific Ocean) divides the countries even more, since not all countries have geopolitical ambitions. It is therefore no coincidence that a "common voice" has not yet emerged in foreign and defense policy.

Lack of a common budget

The studies of the aforementioned reports made in the 1970s regarding federal states established that a significant part of the GDP is redistributed in these states and that at least 20-25 percent of the GDP is centralized due to this and the common administration and defense expenses. Based on this, integration was envisioned in such a way that, in parallel with the centralization of the decision-making sphere, an increasing share of income is centralized, for example, for the introduction of the euro, the centralization of 5-7 percent of GDP was ordered, in order to be able to compensate, through income redistribution, those countries that the introduction of the euro affects negatively. On the other hand, in practice, we find that only one percent of the GDP is centralized, and the net contributing countries are even more than that. The countries negatively affected by the introduction of the euro were not helped, but were essentially robbed by the lending banks of developed countries with huge interest margins.

Taking all of this into account, the realization of a federal state is not a realistic alternative. Further enforcement of centralization will lead to the European Union increasingly taking on the characteristics of an empire, which does not serve the interests of EU citizens, but rather the interests and political and geopolitical ambitions of a narrow political and economic elite. Based on this, the organizations of EuCET reject the efforts to establish a federal state.

What realistic alternatives are available?

Over the past years, several proposals have come up that tried to create alternatives for European cooperation based on realities. In many cases, these were similar and overlapped, three characteristic alternatives can be highlighted.

Europe as a free trade area

A free trade area is a type of trade integration in which the contracting countries do not apply tariffs or trade restrictions to each other. The transformation of the European Union into a free trade area was primarily advocated by the English UKIP (United Kingdom Independence Party) and achieved the exit of Great Britain from the European Union. Many experts, such as Paul de Grauwe, a professor of economics at the University of Leuven and a recognized expert on international finance, say that the only realistic alternative due to the problems with the euro is the creation of a large free trade area.

Flexible cooperation

Flexible cooperation means that the individual member states - in addition to a common minimum valid for everyone - only cooperate in those areas where they are interested. According to them, the cooperation of European countries would be a flexible, changeable structure, in which individual countries would participate to varying degrees, according to their interests. The Treaty of Lisbon also provides an opportunity for such flexible cooperation (EUSZ § 20 reinforced cooperation). The difference is that, while the goal of flexible cooperation is not to continue integration, the paragraph on enhanced cooperation explicitly states that enhanced cooperation is aimed at strengthening the integration process.

Localization-regionalization

By localization, those who propose it generally mean that what can be produced locally with sufficient economy should be produced locally. Localization basically means changing the distribution of power, transferring decision-making powers from unelected transnational corporations and international organizations to democratically elected local communities. The adjective "local" may mean the nation-state, a part of a nation-state, or a region of geographically connected nation-states, depending on the specific issues. The economics of localization is based on the statistically proven fact that the vast majority of human needs can be economically satisfied locally (in the former sense of the word), long-distance trade can be justified primarily by differences in natural geography and the expansion of choices.

EuCET proposal: Union of sovereign nation-states (confederation)

The confederation of nation-states was a fundamentally French idea, proposed by De Gaulle back in the early 1960s. De Gaulle's ideas were written down by Christian Fouchet, the French ambassador to Denmark. This was the Fouchet plan. According to the Fouchet plan, the Union would have four institutions: the Council, in which the heads of state participate, the Council of Ministers, in which the ministers participate, the Political Affairs Committee, in which the delegates of the member states participate, and the European Parliament, which plays an advisory role loads. The preparation and implementation of the decisions is the task of the Political Committee, and the decision itself would be made in the Council, namely by unanimity. If a country does not participate in the decision-making or abstains, the resolutions do not apply to it, but it can join at any time, and then the resolutions become binding on it as well. In this form of cooperation, the member countries retain their sovereignty and participate only in joint projects in which they are interested, nothing can be forced on the member countries. According to the EuCET survey, the vast majority of the Hungarian population would choose the form of nation-state cooperation, but according to other surveys, this alternative would also be supported by the vast majority of the population of other EU member states.

The emotional and identity basis of the confederation would be Europe's common cultural heritage, starting with Greek culture, continuing with Roman state organization and law, medieval Christian art, huge cathedrals, and later European scientific achievements. If we build on a common cultural heritage that is positively valued by all and that distinguishes Europeans from other continents, we can indeed find common ground on which to work more closely together.

In order to protect Europe's cultural values, EuCET's organizations oppose ideologies that seek to destroy Europe's cultural heritage, such as, above all, cultural Marxism, the teaching of the Frankfurt School and the idea of ​​an open society.

The EuCET organizations do not want to solve the European demographic crisis by immigration, but by improving the fertility rates of their own population. It advocates a policy that primarily supports families and children's entrepreneurship and places this issue at the center of social policy.

In order to solve the economic problems of the Union, the role of the euro, which was introduced with political motivation, should be reviewed and transformed into a flexible system that would allow individual countries to pursue a monetary policy that suits their own economic situation.

Finally, with regard to the international situation and foreign policy of the Union, our opinion is that we must start from the realities, that is, from the geopolitical realignment and the different foreign policy interests of the EU countries. Taking everything into account, we think it is correct if the Union's foreign policy is formed according to the five principles of peaceful coexistence adopted by the former non-aligned countries. These are: (1) mutual respect for each other's territorial integrity and sovereignty, (2) mutual non-aggression, (3) mutual non-interference in each other's internal affairs, (4) equality and mutual benefits, and (5) peaceful coexistence.

As the third world, especially China and India, catch up and Russia becomes stronger, the world will become a multipolar system, the superiority of the Euro-Atlantic world will decline from time to time, and this is a natural phenomenon based on the change in the economic power of countries and cannot be stopped. We are not in favor of a new Cold War. The European Union must be economically strong, it must be able to protect its interests, but it must not assume a geopolitical role. If you want to play a role in solving international conflicts, do it within the framework of the UN.

Why does Europe need sovereign nation states?

The questioning of the existence of nation-states by leading politicians and opinion-makers has been a process for decades. German Chancellor Helmut Kohl, for example, already emphasized in 1996 that "the nation-state... is not able to solve the problems of the XXI. the great problems of the 20th century", and that the disintegration of the European nation-states into a single large political union is "a question of war and peace". Jürgen Habermas (1988) formulated a systematic critique of tradition, which questioned the relevance of past values, and considered concepts such as "the people" or "the nation" to be dangerous fantasies that undermine diversity. EU-elite and post-national commentators see nation-states, nationalism, traditions based on historical continuity and the legitimacy of identities built around national cultures as clearly bad, as they are all responsible for the violence of Europe's past. Instead of strengthening traditions, the EU has embraced transnational cosmopolitanism and identity politics, where there is no legitimate place for nation-states, national cultures or national identities.

On the other hand, all surveys in this direction show that the vast majority of European citizens stick to their own nation and that democracy, which is highly valued by the Union, can only function within the framework of a nation-state. It is therefore necessary to relearn how important the values ​​of the past are for today and to support national feelings and traditions. The EU must recognize national cultures and sovereign nation-states as the backbone of Europe and let go of its transnational idealism. Europe's strength lies in the diversity of its member states, not in their forced similarity.

Our important contribution to the rehabilitation of the nation was Sir Roger Scruton's book, The Need for Nations (2004), which reminds us of what we have forgotten and explains where supranational organizations or proponents of transnationalism are wrong, why patriotism is a positive thing and why national loyalty is necessary for democracy to work.

EuCET rejects efforts to abolish nation-states and the philosophies that support them (Frankfurt school, open society) and supports political and intellectual movements that seek to preserve the nation-state.

Establishing the EuCET network

The European Union Civil Cooperation Council was created in order to be a part of and organize those civil movements, institutions and individuals that envision the future of Europe and the cooperation of European nation-states based on Europe's three-thousand-year-old cultural and historical traditions. Europe can be proud of its past, Greek philosophy and art, Roman state organization, Gothic monuments of the Christian faith, and its achievements in science and technology. Almost as many languages ​​are spoken in Europe as there are countries, each language preserves the history and culture of a nation for a thousand years or even longer and forms the basis of national identity. From the point of view of preserving Europe's cultural heritage, we consider it essential to preserve national identities and national cultures, and we can only imagine European cooperation based on this.

In order to preserve Europe's cultural heritage, within the framework of EuCET, we want to broadly involve like-minded civil organizations, Christian-national-conservative trade unions, workers' councils and various knowledge centers and social scientists.

In our opinion, citizens who qualify as civilians 24 hours a day also carry out advocacy activities at their workplace. The age of traditional class-fighting trade union movements is over. The display of party political interests divides the members of society and weakens the enforcement of targeted professional and existential interests in the direction of public and private sector institutions and companies.

The priority of economic issues in trade union work cannot be disputed. The interest of the state and company owners is the most efficient management possible, which cannot be independent of the management and the performance of the employed employees. The alignment of the interests of the three main actors of the company assumes the priority of professional arguments based on the fact that they are traveling in the same boat.

We say it is important to create a family atmosphere in the operation. Therefore, the added values ​​of the owners, management and employees must be evaluated objectively. Job creation and its long-term preservation require risk-taking from the owner-investors, insight into the market conditions from the employees, and exemplary work. The result of the activity, carried out in a good atmosphere, serving a common goal, can be divided in proportion to the investments, it gives the opportunity for new investments, while ensuring the sustainability of individual and family interests in the long term.

EuCET intends to expand the advocacy role of civil society and the display of civil courage in the future by becoming a partner of Christian-national-conservative trade unions.

We believe that the diversity of the participants gives us the opportunity to reach a larger and larger part of society with our ideas and to give encouragement to those who think like us, but do not dare to openly represent their opinions in the increasingly oppressive European atmosphere.

In accordance with the above, with the partner help of the National Federation of Hungarian Workers' Councils, which has been cooperating with us for 11 years, we can warmly welcome the Italian union UGL among us. According to our hopes, III. With the help of our civil partners participating in the congress, EuCET can be further expanded.

EuCET, in the ongoing debate about the future of Europe and always in the future, stands boldly and openly for the protection of Europe's cultural heritage and nation-states.

The professional community of EuCET