FEDERATION OF EUROPE
Aneta Antušová
Katedra politológie
Univerzita Komenského, Bratislava
As close ties between the states of Europe (as for example France and Germany)
would be considered impossible a hundred years ago. Nowadays, there is a narrow
cooperation and not only between those two states. We are living in the age of European
Integration.
The states of the European Union (EU) share a common market, borders and also a common
currency is spreading around. Fifteen states have already integrated in the field of economics,
agriculture, security area, and there is increasingly more and more discussion about
integration also in the political field. Therefore it is appropriate to ask what this integration
shall be like. What will it be exactly? The 'United States of Europe' on the basis of fedration,
confederation, perhaps, an unitarian state of Europe?
I think that I can exclude the last mentioned possibility straight away. I am going to think
about the EU in terms of federalism in my work.
When I mentioned 'United States of Europe', it was not made without any purpose. It's
suppossed to be the path to comparation EU with the United States of America as an example
of the most successful federation of nowdays.
My hypotheses is that the European integration is the process which has taken place within
the framework of federalism and in recent time it started to be push closer and closer
towards federation. To be able to clarify and to confirm the hypotheses, it's useful to identify
the relationship between the terms federalism and federation.
Federation, according to M.J.C. Vile, is "a specific organizational form which includes
structures, institutions and techniques, which serve to maintain the balance between mutual
independence and interdependence between levels of government."1 It is the concept which is
concerning with the political relationships in the state. Federation 'tells' about relationship
between central government and regional units in the way that central government in its
decision procedures incorporates those units on the basis of the common federal constitution.
On the other hand, federalism may be defined as a "political device for establishing viable
institutions and flexible relationships capable of facilitating inter-state relations and intercommunity cooperation."2 In such a meaning, federalism is much broader term than
federation. There may be federalism without federation but not vice versa. It recognizes the
existance of federal ideas which express a social reality composed by multiple aims and
1
Michael Burgess, "Federalism and Frderation : A Reappraisal" in Michael Burgess and Alain-G. Gagnon
(eds.), Comparative Federalism and Federation : Competing traditions and future directions (New York :
Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1993)
2
Ibid
identities.3 That's way it's important to keep in mind that federalism is not the same as
federation. Federalism as the framework suits to federation as well as to confederation or to
the union with the specific aims.
Even if the USA and the EU have been pushed to the process of integration in the way
deriving from the concept of federalism, they have not achieved the same 'level'
of
integration.
The USA have become a relatively strong federal state after the very short period of
confederation (1781-87). Well, in the time when US Constitution was presented to
conventions in the 13 states for ratification in 1787-88, there was difficulty deciding what to
call the government. At that time Madison said that the new government 'is, in strictness,
neither a national nor a federal' but 'a cmposition of both' and according to Alexis de
Tocqueville it was 'an incomplete national government'.
On the other hand it is still not clear what the EU is and what it should be.
It is neither international nor national, nor wholly confederal nor wholly federal. "A key
classic difference between a confederal union and federal one is the inability of a confederal
government to legislate for individuals. It has fundamental implications for reprezentation
because a confederation is ordinarly a union of governments or states, while a federation is a
union of states as well as individuals, usually in their capacity as citizens of the constituent
states within the federal union".4
In the case of the EU it´s possible to observe the confederal principles as well as the federal
ones. There are confederal features in reprezentation what in the EU circumstances means that
reprezentatives were in some way coopted by national governments, not elected by EU´s
citizens or even elected by some other reprezentative body of the EU like the European
Parliament (EP). From the way of establishing of institutions arrives many other
consequences as the political responsibility of the reprezentatives or whose interests they put
across : local, national, European-wide (?). On the other hand, direct election of such body as
the EP is one of the main federal features in the EU. The members of Parliament are
responsible just to their voters and political parties. Thus, they could reprezent the more
European-wide concerns. The decision-making process, especially the rules of voting could
be seen as the other area for recognizing direction of federalism which prevail in the EU.
Usually the decision-making process which required the voting by unanimity gives much
3
Ibid.
According to J. Kincaid, "Cofederal Federalism and Citizen Reprezentation in the European Union" in : West
European Politics, Volume 22, April 1999, No 2
4
more opportunities for railroading the national interest of each member state as the voting by
qualified majority. That´s because each of the states has, de facto, the veto power, so to adopt
some decision it´s important to make a consensus. Autonomous status of the European
Union´s legal system is a very important federal feature. Some of the legal norms have a
direct applicability, so they enter to national legal system of the member states without the
necessity of approvement by the national legislation body. That express that such legislation
of the EU has a direct effect for a citizen of its member state.
That´s way let´s have a closer look at a type of reprezentation, the way of voting and legal
supermacy in the individual institutions of the EU. As the result of searching for integration
features which prevailed in the EU we could determine the type of union it is (federation,
confederation).
European Commission
Commission is an executive arm of EU which includes confederal and federal principles as
well. Even if, Commissioners do not represent national interest and they are not responsible to
their national governaments, they are appionted by them. Members vote by (unrecorded)
majority votes, but there is normative pressure for unanimity what in the case of EU means
stage more open for considerate of national interests.
Council of Ministres
Council is confederal in structure but more federal in many of its operations because actual
workings are likely to be pushed in a more federal direction by using qualified majority
voting, while first-order decision-making in a more confederal direction. The Council
necessarily represent not only nation-state interest but also non-national, subnational, and
Union-wide concerns.
European Parliament (EP)
Parliament is organized along party lines and so, structurally is more federal, even almost
national. Direct election of the Parliament members by citzens of the EU is one of the main
federal features of EU´s institutions. But operationally, its procedures are connecting with the
more structurally confederal Council and it has less ability to affect the lives of the people
who elect it. Even if, it has democratic legitimacy (citizens are reprezented as individuals) it
lacks powers.
European Court of Justice (ECJ)
The Court is structurally confederal body insofar as each member state nominates a judge for
it but it preserves the status of highly independet institution from member states and interest
groups. Unusually, in the relations of the EU, the Court has no direct accountability to other
EU institutions and so it´s principal effective force for federation.
What seems to have developed in the EU is a „confederal federation“. The union
whose institutions include both : federal way of acting that provoke to see the EU as a single
body as well as more wider confederal ways which are connecting with the view of EU like
an international organization of independent national states with very weak mutual
coordinating policy. According to Kincaid, EU is characterized by confederal order of
government that operates in a federal mode. As federal mode of operation is meant practical
policymaking which includes demands of functional integration, in other words, demands of
closer, more cooperative integration. But this federal mode of effective operation is limited by
confederal order. The order of EU is quasi-constitutional one (constitution = the Treaty)
necessitated by sovereignity claims of the EU´s national states. So as such, the single nature
of the Union asks from its institutions and decision-making elites to respect national interest
of the members.
Thus the task what the EU is and what it shall be is still questionable. There are several areas
of cooperation among the member states and some of the objectives of the EU which indicate
future stronger pressure on integration towards the federation or they have been already seen
as the federal elements of the EU. An illustration of such elements there are single Monetary
Union of the EU´s member states as well as the autonomous legal system. The states of EU
use the single currency and the only exceptions are Great Britain, Ireland, Greece and
Denmark. European law is superior to national law and also it has supermancy in
interpretation of law. Another example of closer federal ties inside of the EU is European
Community, especially an intragovernmental tendencies of relations between its institutions
established mainly by Maastrich Treaty in 1992. According to reform of cooperation between
the European Communities´ institutions, rooted in the Treaty, the European Parliament is
much more involved in the decision-making proces and thus must approve some types of
legislation and may also veto some types of legislation. The European Court of Justice plays a
major role in applying Community law to member states, with the Commission having
authority to fine „non-complying“ states. There is also a complex relationship between the
Council, the Commission and the Parliament on Community budget matters, even while the
member states still play the crucial role thanks to their "gatekeeper´s" position in area of taxes
and financial resources for the EU. Anyway, these, in effect, intragovermental relations reflect
an intensification of integration along more federal lines. Next two assumptions are more
normative that the other ones mentioned up here. The first one is connecting with political
culture, the other one with subnational level of the EU. The Union is made up of democratic
nation-states whose citizens are accustomed on demoratic reprezentation in government.
Rational citizens thus refuse to invest too much power in institutions which are not electorally
responsible to them. It has provoked the press for a voice of citizens in decision-making
institutions what is inevitably connecting with closer integration. The economic objectives,
especially free-trade objectives evoke pressures because free-trade requires the lowering of
tariff and not-tariff barriers to trade made by not only national goverment but also by regional
and local government that ask for a voice in EU decision-making organs in order to protect
their interests.
As I have already mentioned the tendencies toward federation of the EU are also established
in the official documents of the Union. In 1987 Single European Act pushed European
Community in federal direction by establishing a single internal marked, by enforcement of
competences of ECJ ( for example Community law become to be binding on member state´s
citizens ) and by expansioning majority voting in Commission. Maastricht Treaty in 1992
reinforced the extent of federal features by committing the EU to economic and monetary
union, including a single currency. The other important steps toward federation like extending
qualified majority voting in the Council, establishing Union citizenship or adding to the EU´s
economic dimension an agreement to implement a commmon foreign and security policy took
place in the same document beside the proclaimations calling for decisions to be made „as
closely as possible to the citizen“ or calling for „close cooperation on justice and home
affairs“.5
It´s possible to follow the division of the EU into three pillars with division of federal /
confederal tendencies within the Union. The first pillar - European Community is much more
federalistic than the other two. Acting of member states in Common Foreing and Security
Policy as well as in the pillar of Justice and Home Affairs is rooted in confederalistic
principles, even almost achieving the international level of relations among the states.
As we could see the European Union is very complex structure which is difficult to be
place into a single form. We can try to compare the institutions and the patterns of acting
within them with the simillar ones in the other federations or confederations as for example
USA but the system of exceptions which has occured in every institution or procedure of the
EU made such comparation almost unreasonable.
5
J. Kincaid, "Cofederal Federalism and Citizen Reprezentation in the European Union" in West European
Politics, Volume 22, April 1999, No 2, p. 39
Even though, the comparison of internal structure of EU and USA is questionable, we can still
ask why the diffrent level of integration between them were achieved even if the prointegration goals were simillar.
One of the possible answers on this question could be the complex of demografical, historical
and linguinistical determinants which also includes differences and consequences arrived
from the types of establishing states organizations, the levels of their development and so on.
Though common integration roots which can be seen in both - USA and EU, diffrent model of
integration has prevailed. The USA under the permanent pressure of being threatend by
another world power - Great Britain in the time of the establishement put the greatest
emphases on the issue of defense in the proces of creating the Federation. Exactly the threat
from the part of external aggressor led to the stronger gathering of the states and to the
creating of powerful federal centre.
The beginnings of EU formation, the establishing of ECSC (European Coal and Steel
Community) were similarly as in the USA connected with the attempt of keeping the peace in
the Europe however the threat of the external aggressor was missing here. The economic
cooperation should have ensured the peace between the MEMBER states. But the situation in
the world and its development brought far bigger danger for the Europe - a rolling US
economics and later an expansive grouping of the Asian Tigers. The geopolitical economic
pressure resulted in the orientation of European integration towards the closer cooperation in
the economic area.
Thus the EU seems to be the organization with limited utilitarian nature. However deeply it
can penetrate domestic economic life of each member state, it has not generated strong
demand for a closer cooperation in other fields or for a strong federal centre which ensure
security.
While in 18th century the United States of America were build from colonies of British
Empire which shared the same „state“ structure, in the process of European integration there
were not even variety of diffrent state organizations ( varied from republican democracy to
constitucional monarchy, from unitarian state to federation ) but also the phenomenon of
national states which complicated the result
The degree of development of establishing states, degree of development of their
infrastructure, economics didn´t play unimportant role in the process.
As the result of all those determinants, nowdays, we deal with the EU as the organization of
multiply compounded nature characterized by mixture of confederal and federal principles
reprezented in the three Communities and their acquis communitaire. It is compounded
system of territorial - local, regional, national and European - loyalties and interests. Those
functional and symbolic interest are rooted in nationality, ideology, religion, class,
environment and so on and they flow into the cross-pressures present in the Union.6
The imprints of federalism are significantly present in the process of European
integration. Jan-Erik Lane wrote that „the EU, ..., is about how nation-states construct and
implement common rules for equitable interaction among its peoples. The EU is more market
that state, but markets cannot operate without public regulation.“7
Though the nature of the EU is so complex (it is mixed confederal and federal features
together) and often economicly viewed (as Lane mentioned up here), there are some
tendencies and also officialy established tools direct to ´United States of Europe´. In recent
time, the European Treaties (as for example Maastricht or Amsterdam Treaty) started to
pushed the EU integration closer and closer towards federation. There could be seen a
foundation for the union build up on the basis of federal state.
6
According to J. Kincaid, "Cofederal Federalism and Citizen Reprezentation in the European Union" in West
European Politics, Volume 22, April 1999, No 2
7
Jan-Erik Lane, "Federalizing Europe? The Cost, Benefits, and Preconditions of Federal Political Systems" in
West European Politics, Volume 22, January 1999, No 1, p. 204.
Literature
Lucian M. Ashworth, David Long, New Perspectives on International Functionalism
(London: Macmillian Press Ltd., 1999)
Micheal Burgess, "Federalism and Federation : A Reappraisal" in Michael Burgess and
Alain- G. Gagnon (eds.), Comparative Federalism and Federation :
Competing
traditions and future directions (New York : Harvester
Wheatsheaf, 1993), pp. 3 - 14
Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, James Madison, Listy federalistu (Olomouc : Univerzita
Palackého, 1994)
John Kincaid, "Confederal Federalism and Citizen reprezentation in the EU" in West
European Politics, Volume 22, April 1999, No 2, pp. 34 - 58.
Jan-Erik Lane, "Federalizing Europe? The Cost, Benefits, and Preconditions of Federal
Political Systems" in West European Politics, Volume 22, January 1999, No 1,
pp. 203 - 204.
Michael J. Laslovich, "The American Tradition : Federalism in the United States" in Michael
Burgess and Alain-G. Gagnon (eds.), Comparative Federalism and
Federation : Competing traditions and future directions (New York :
Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1993), pp. 187 - 202.
John Pinder, "The New European Federalism : The Idea and the Achievements" in Michael
Burgess and Alain-G. Gagnon (eds.), Comparative Federalism and Federation
: Competing traditions and future directions (New York : Harvester
Wheatsheaf, 1993), pp. 45 - 66.