A federal or intergovernmental European Union? : the role of EU presidencies 2000-2013

Abstract

This study focuses on the role of EU Presidencies and whether they arc effective in promoting a more federal or intergovernmental EU. As the debate on the future of Europe has once again been rekindled by the recent financial crisis which seems to have uncovered faults in the current institutional setup, the role of EU Presidencies in shaping the future of the Union becomes even more relevant. The rotating Presidency has a long tradition in European politics. Introduced in the early days of the European Coal and Steel Community every Member State, regardless of its size has had the right and responsibility of chairing the Union for a defined period of time. Whether the EU was at fault for the difficult current economic situation or not and whether it will be able to deal with such hard times or not will depend largely on the Member State's actions. Different theories of European integration offers different models of Europe and it is difficult to guess what the EU will look like in the near future. The so-called founding fathers of the EU have all had an influence on this European project and in a way, EU Presidencies were both an influence and a result on the road to EU integration. Recent Treaties have tried to face the problems of enlargement and legitimacy and as a result, The Treaty of Lisbon, has had a big impact on Presidencies of what is now a Union of 28 Member State. The roles of the Presidencies remain much the same and these can be grouped into five. These include, management and administration, point of contact, mediator, initiator and representative functions. This study focuses on six case studies of different Presidencies since 2000, comparing 'traditional' federal states and 'traditional' intergovernmental states. The relationship between these r.011ntries holding the presidency and the rest of the EU, together with domestic issues has had an impact not just on the set of programme but also on the outcomes and conclusions. In shaping a more federal or intergovernmental EU, this study tries to demonstrate how 'traditional' federal states with a more suprational vision of the EU use their Presidency to discuss the issue of the future of Europe while those countries with a more intergovernmental vision of the EU try to avoid the issue being discussed.