EU Integration: A Narrative.

           The European Union has undergone multiple distinct periods while undergoing a process of integration. Similar to States, the EU has been through periods of both strong and alternatively weak support. The birth and growth of the EU is a compelling story, one in which recent economic recession events will undoubtedly mark a chapter.

            To examine the motivations behind the existence of the EU of today, it is important to keep in mind the initial purpose behind the creation of the EU. After a second World War, in which hundreds of millions of Europeans perished and destruction occurred on a level never before seen, the individual nations of Europe understood the urgency of ensuring that this level of loss and conflict never happen again. After the failure of the loosely united League of Nations formed in response to World War I, the nations of Europe understood the need to create something more binding than a traditional international alliance or collection of treaties. To achieve this end, the six most powerful nations of Western Europe pooled their heavy national resources into the collective European Coal and Steel Community in 1952. Thus coal and steel, two primary supplies needed by a nation engaged in warfare, were under the collective control of the community. This successful cooperation led to the Treaty of Rome in 1957, which solidified the arrangement into the European Economic Community. The optimism of this period was high for academic analysts at the time. Neo-functionalism emerged and sought to explain the actions of Western nations as stemming from their goals within the EC, highlighting that transnational benefits would become increasingly apparent to States and on both the national and international level States would seek to increase their participation and cede more decision making powers to the EC. This period of integration optimism, in which it was expected that "political spill-over" would result in enhanced integration (Pollack, 18) came to a screeching halt with the first major crisis the EC faced.

            The "Empty Chair Crisis" stemmed from Charles De Gualle taking issue with proposals from the Commission that were in line with the EC's ever-expanding role and influence over national actors. As a result, France boycotted all European institutions, which at the time required unanimous participation to accomplish anything. Charles De Gaulle's distrust of supranationalism dealt a hard blow to European integration and the optimistic perception of an ever-increasing EC.  Though this incident was finally resolved in 1966 by the Luxembourg compromise, it marked the beginning of the "Doldrums Era" in European integration.

            The Doldrums Era lasted until the mid 1980's, and were marked by the perception that States were still acting in their own best interests, as advocated by the new school of Intergovernmentalism at the time (which emphasized that European States interacted with one another internationally, but not as a part of a larger transnational framework or political structure envisioned by neo-functionalists) (Pollack, 19). Thus, the fate of the eventual EU looked bleak, and many scholars left the field of study altogether. Still, this era allowed perhaps for a more realistic understanding that nations still strongly valued their sovereignty, and acted rationally with their own interests in mind, as held by the emerging concept of Liberal Intergovernmentalism. Then, along with the fall of the Soviet Union and the dissolution of the old divisions of states into communist and anti-communist groups, the EU experienced a brand new wave of unprecedented growth.

            Shortly after the end of the Cold War, Eastern European nations began to join the EU. This was a drastic change to the previously Western-dominated power structure of the EU, and with the new, smaller Eastern countries came several new pro-integration ideas and demands for a voice of their own in the international forum of the EU. Thus, Eastern States saw the opportunity for their voice to be heard and to shape policy within Europe, and were particularly receptive to institutional change by the vacuum created from the fall of Soviet prop governments. They sought to strengthen and foster greater integration within the EU, even as member states such as France and England raised occasional objections.

            This overview of the EU concludes with a look at the present financial (and governmental) crisis shaking Europe. Starting with the financial crisis of 2007-8 and then the recession in the US , the interconnected EU market soon suffered the effects as well. These problems became urgent with the collapse of the Greek economic situation in a sea of debt, and later the governments of Spain, Italy and Ireland (which, though not as bad as Greece showed dramatic increases in unemployment and were considered to be high risk for defaulting). Some are debating whether Germany will continue to be willing to "bail-out" these other member states, and whether or not the EU will financially collapse under the strain of the present recession.
            These fears are unfounded. As discussed above, the EU has already survived numerous 'hiccups' on its road toward ever-increasing integration. Similar financial difficulties were faced and survived in the 1970's. Later this week Italy is coming off the "at-risk" list for default as it re-organizes its debt and institutes necessary measures to achieve financial responsibility. Other nations will follow suit, although it may take some time. Departure from the EU now would only increase the economic uncertainty plaguing many member states, and would make no sense for any rational political actor. Still, the recession and current crisis is already having an impact on the way debt and now "euro-bonds" are organized, and will likely leave the EU changed once it emerges from the present situation.