Page 27 - AEI Insights 2018 Vol 4 Issue 1

AEI Insights, Vol 4, Issue 1, 2018

anniversary saw the initiative of the European Commission led by its President Jean-Claude
Juncker emerged with a White Paper on the future of Europe. It was a comprehensive summary
of what the EU was living and it asked: “What future do we want for ourselves, for our children
and for our Union? It reminds us that: “Europe’s place in the world is shrinking” (European
Commission 2017, p. 8). It acknowledged there was a “tense global context” and that ”Europe
cannot be naïve and has to take care of its own security. Being a “soft power” is no longer
powerful enough when force can prevail over rules” (p. 9). It also referred to the “…The return
of isolationism has cast doubt over the future of international trade and multilateralism” (p. 9)
clearly indicating the new Trump administration and that “shaping globalisation”… “…will be
a growing challenge”. Surprisingly but not really, the background to the White Paper made
only an indirect reference to Brexit when it said “And last year, one of our Member States
voted to leave the Union” (European Commission 2017, p. 6).

The context of the White Paper was itself quite daring in its breadth but the recommendations
were of a simplicity and openness which was breathtaking. The approach by the Commission
was not to seek out some complex set of indecipherable set of targets to put to the member
states but a referendum of member states on where to go next. It proposed the establishment of
an agreement for the EU for its future direction for 2025. It was remarkably logical and asked
the member states to make a choice about the direction, speed and priorities of the EU for the
next period. It divided the choices into five. The first option was to carry on the same. This
meant that there would be the maintenance of the single market including its strengthening.
The EU should pursue trade agreements and where possible improve the functioning of the
Euro as the single Eurozone currency. There would be continued cooperation on external
borders and of course much work to do around the EUs system of asylum seekers. The
expectation was that there would be progress on security and foreign affairs with one voice as
well as closer defence cooperation between member states and with other states. There would
be budget improvements and less complexity on decision making of EU matters. Speaking with
one voice on foreign affairs and closer defence cooperation. The other scenarios were
progressively more committal and more in the direction of federation. They included scenario
2, “Nothing but the single market”. Scenario 3 included “Those who want more do more” while
scenario 4 stated “Doing less more efficiently and number 5 which said “Doing much more
together” (European Commission 2017). The European Commission provided the platform for
each member state to debate within its own institutions on what was best for their country and
for an orderly discussion to come up with an idea of the level of integration. The White paper
opened an honest and widespread debate on how Europe should evolve in the years to come.
This call was to open up debate within the EU, member states and citizens and looking for
some collective answer for the December 2017 European Council meeting. The Commission
did not want to be seen as forcing the hand of the member states and putting words into their
mouths. This was a decision by the member states as to what level of commitment to the
European Union their nation would accept. The purpose here was to avoid the political
backlashes that would be faced about “power in Brussels’.

Some of the preamble of the White Paper noted that the 2008 global financial crisis had had a
disastrous effect on many member states. In particular, the paper highlighted the impact and
severity on youth to the extent that there was a risk of a generation being less well off than their
parents. The White Paper noted that the European Union was witnessing an ageing population
and was almost the oldest in the world. Other worrying features of the European Union
included the nature of changing occupations and the inability of the EU to stay with these
changes as well as the pressures driving immigration which it stated would increase. In terms
of the governance of the European Union, the White Paper noted that there had been too often

27