650Today the European Union is in a systemic crisis. The main challenges are well known: Euro crisis underlined by insufficient competitiveness of the EU economy; migration crisis, which is feeding Euroscepticism and ultra-right radicalism; Brexit referendum that highlighted all the defects of the EU political system, primarily those related to the ideology of integration and identity issues. These external shocks have provoked a systemic crisis because, over the last ten years, the institutional and political system of the EU has considerably degraded. This article attempts to identify key negative trends in the development of this system which took place in the past decade: 1) the erosion of solidarity and the collapse of the “inevitable” integration ideology; 2) an increasing heterogeneity within the EU as a result of enlargement that limited potential of Europeanization; 3) reinforcement of the intergovernmental method of governance to the prejudice of a communitarian one; 4) an increasing gap between the image of the EU as an “omnipotent bureaucracy”, the scope of tasks, and modest resources; 5) growing legitimacy deficit and 6) the problem of leadership. On this basis, the paper provides a critical analysis of possible transformation scenarios for the institutional and political system of the European Union, an assessment of their probability, ensuing risks and opportunities. The paper concludes that the most possible option is a further development of various elements of flexible integration, which would transform the EU into a “core and periphery” system. Flexibility would allow combining the federalization of the EU core, and the current (or even lower) level of integration for those countries who do not want or cannot take new obligations.
European Union, EU institutional system, EU political system, systemic crisis of the EU, flexible integration
REFERENCES
1. Borko Yu. A. Evropeiskii Soyuz v XXI veke: tekushchie dela i fundamental’nye problemy [European Union in the XXI Century: Current Affairs and Key Problems]. Contemporary Europe, 2015, July–September, no. 3, pp. 7-16.
2. Tevdoi-Burmuli A. I. Rasshirenie ES i evolyutsiya etnopoliticheskoi situatsii v Evrope [EU Enlargement and the Evolution of the Ethnopolitical Situation in Europe]. Mirovaya ekonomika i mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya, 2005, no. 10, pp. 33-44.
3. Kaveshnikov N. Yu. Lissabonskii dogovor i ego posledstviya dlya razvitiya ES [The Lisbon Treaty and its Implications for the Development of the EU]. Aktual’nye problemy Evropy, 2010, no. 2, pp. 54-76.
4. Butorina O. V., Borko Yu.A., eds. Rasshirenie Evropeiskogo Soyuza i Rossiya [The Enlargement of the European Union and Russia]. Moskva, Delovaya literatura, 2006. 568 p.
5. Tevdoi-Burmuli A.I. “Velosipedist na bolote”: uroki i perspektivy rasshireniya ES v XXI veke [“Cyclist in the Swamp”: Lessons and Prospects of EU Enlargement in the XXI century]. Vestnik MGIMO Universiteta, 2013, no. 4 (31), pp. 106-112.
6. Falkner G., Treib O. Three Worlds of Compliance or Four? The EU‑15 Compared to New Member States. Journal of Common Market Studies, 2008, vol. 46, no 2, pp. 293-313.
7. Emmanouilidis J. A. and all. New Pact for Europe: Second Report. A Publication of the King Baudouin Foundation, the Bertelsmann Stiftung and the European Policy Centre. October, 2014. 42 p. Available at: http://www.newpactforeurope.eu/documents/new_pact_for_europe_2nd_report.pdf (accessed 30.12.2016).
8. Dougan M. The Treaty of Lisbon 2007: Winning Minds, Not Hearts. Common Market Law Review, 2008, vol. 45, pp. 617-703.
9. Schoutheete de, Ph. Making the Institutions Work Better and More Effectively Together: Priorities for the New Commission. CEPS Commentary, 1 October 2014. 5 p. Available at: https://www.ceps.eu/system/files/PdS%20%20Institutional%20priorities.pdf (accessed 18.01.2017).
10. Kaveshnikov N. Yu. Metody upravleniya v Evropeiskom soyuze [Methods of Governance in the European Union]. Mirovaya ekonomika i mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya, 2015, no. 8, pp. 49-60.
11. Majone G. Evidence, Argument and Persuasion in the Policy Process. New Haven, Yale University Press, 1992. 192 p.
12. Bertoncini Y. What is the impact of the EU interventions at national level? Notre Europe Studies and Reports no. 73, June 2009. 20 p. Available at: http://www.notre-europe.eu/media/euandlegislation-bertoncini-ne-jdi-may14.pdf?pdf=ok (accessed 18.01.2017).
13. Tholoniat L. The Career of the Open Method of Coordination: Lessons from a “Soft” EU Instrument. West European Politics, 2010, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 93-117.
14. Lord C. Legitimacy, Democracy and the EU: when Abstract Questions Become Practical Policy Problems. One Europe or Several Policy Paper 03, 2000. 8 p. Available at: http://mcrit.com/scenarios/visionsofeurope/documents/one%20Europe%20or%20Several/C%20Lord.pdf (accessed 18.01.2017).
15. Tsoukalis L. The Unhappy Union state of the Union. London, Policy Network, 2014. 86 p.
16. Kaveshnikov N. Yu. Malye i vrednye? [Small and Harmful?]. International Trends, 2008, September-December, vol. 6, no. 3(18), pp. 84-92.
17. Bol’shova N.N. “Pegida” kak primer massovykh protestnykh dvizhenii, voznikshikh v Evrope pod vliyaniem migratsionnogo krizisa [“Pegida” as an Example of Mass Protest Movements that Emerged in Europe under the Influence of the Migration Crisis]. Polis. Political Studies, 2016, no. 3, pp. 123-137.
18. Kaveshnikov N. Yu. Proekt Energeticheskogo soyuza ES v kontekste otnoshenii mezhdu Rossiei i Evropeiskim soyuzom [The Energy Union Project of the European Union in the Context of EU-Russia Relations]. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 25: Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya i mirovaya politika, 2015, no. 2, pp. 73-95.
19. Tsibulina A. N. Bankovskii i fiskal’nyi soyuzy v ES: chto vazhnee? [Banking and Fiscal Unions in the EU: Which is more Important?] Vestnik MGIMO Universiteta, 2014, no. 4 (37), pp. 155-161.
20. Butorina O. V. Prichiny i posledstviya krizisa v zone evro [Causes and Consequences of the Crisis in the Euro Zone]. Voprosy ekonomiki, 2012, no. 12, pp. 98-115.
21. Babynina L. O. Gibkaya integratsiya v Evropeiskom soyuze: teoriya i praktika primeneniya [Flexible Integration in the European Union: Theory and Practice]. Moskva, URSS, 2012. 304 p.
22. Kaveshnikov N. Yu. “Gibkaya integratsiya” v Evropeiskom soyuze [“Flexible integration” in the European Union]. International Trends, 2011, May-August, vol. 9, no. 2 (26), pp. 58-69.
23. Koenig N. A Differentiated View of Differentiated Integration. Jacques Delors Institute Policy Paper, 23 July 2015, 13 p. Available at: http://www.delorsinstitut.de/2015/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/20150723_DifferentiatedIntegration_JDIB_Nicole-Koenig.pdf (accessed 18.01.2017).
24. Babynina L. O. 20 let Maastrikhtskomu dogovoru: kuda dvizhetsya Evropeiskii soyuz? [20 Years of the Maastricht Treaty: European Union, Where Does It Go]. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 25: Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya i mirovaya politika, 2012, no. 2, pp. 4-18.
25. Editorial Comments. Some thoughts concerning the Draft Treaty on a Reinforced Economic Union. Common Market Law Review, 2012, vol. 49, pp. 1-14.
Registered in System SCIENCE INDEX
No comments