Can Europe Work? A Plan to Rescue the Union
The European Union has become incompetent and unpopular. Germany and France must flout Maastricht, attacking unemployment lest it wreck the euro's debut. Without a far more flexible union, a 45-year effort will fall apart.
George Soros, sole proprietor of Soros Fund Management, which serves as principal investment adviser to the Quantum Group of Funds, is Chairman of the Soros Foundations, a network of foundations operating in 25 countries.
The future of Europe has become a very complicated and technical subject, although it really ought to be very simple. We need a strong and viable European Union. Without it, the world would be back where it was at the end of the First World War. Indeed, the map of Europe today looks largely as it did in 1919, but with one big difference -- 15 countries of Western Europe are linked in the European Union.
Its creators brought a union into existence to prevent a recurrence of war, particularly one between Germany and France. For 45 years it has been successful in this mission. But the collapse of the Soviet empire and the reunification of Germany upset the delicate balance. Chancellor Helmut Kohl wanted to ground a united Germany firmly in Europe, and the French insisted on creating a stronger union to contain a larger Germany. Margaret Thatcher objected and her successor as British prime minister, John Major, exacted heavy concessions, but there was a sense of urgency, a self-imposed deadline, as leaders of the member states reached a new agreement for Europe. The Treaty on European Union was initialed in the Dutch city of Maastricht in December 1991 and signed two months later.
Maastricht established three pillars for what was now to be styled the European Union: a common currency, a common foreign and security policy, and a common justice and internal policy. Along with this, member states acknowledged that to fulfill its mission the EU must open itself to eastward expansion and admit in a timely fashion countries that qualified. That should have been the end of the story and we should be living happily ever after, with a new institution for a new world. But there is something profoundly wrong in Europe.
This is a premium article
You must be a Foreign Affairs subscriber to continue reading. If you are already a print subscriber, click here to activate your online access.
Log In
Buy PDF
Buy a premium PDF reprint of this article.Related
Recent political transitions in Belgrade and Zagreb have created a historic chance to make lasting peace in the Balkans. Torn by ethnic strife for a century and a half, the region must now choose between disintegration into ever-smaller ethnic states and integration into the European Union. The EU must actively facilitate the latter, or the Balkans could suffer another round of bloody war.
America now faces the prospect of economic conflicts with both Europe and East Asia. The United States and the European Union have already fired the first shots of retaliatory sanctions over their ever-growing trade disputes. On the other side of the world, meanwhile, Asian countries are creating a bloc of their own that could include preferential trade arrangements and an Asian Monetary Fund. These developments could produce a tripolar world and hamper global economic integration. To avert this outcome, the United States must quell its domestic backlash against globalization and reassert its economic leadership in the world. The new Bush administration should make multilateral trade liberalization a top priority -- or it will face unpleasant economic and political consequences as the U.S. and foreign economies slow.
The EU's constitutional convention has revived the old cleavage between those who fear the union will trample the rights of member states and those who think it is not enough of a superstate. Both camps miss the point. Despite some serious flaws, the draft constitution does much to advance the EU's core project: to create a federal union that celebrates the plurality of the continent's many peoples.
