Laurens Jan Brinkhorst “50 Years of Personal Experience in Europe”
On Wednesday 2 March 2011, the Master Class was honoured by a lecture of Prof. L.J. Brinkhorst a former leading figure in the Dutch representation in Europe and currently a professor of European Law . His experience concerns the major institutions, enabling him to give an insiders view on European Integration.
His personal experiences on how EU policies is made, shaped during history and influenced by national politicians was built on four pillars, all colourful illustrated with personal experiences:
1) The origins of European Integration has been shaped by lawyers
2) Expansion and deepening goes hand in hand
3) Crises is an element of integration
4) Supranationalism versus intergovernmentalism
The origins of European Integration has been shaped by lawyers
The core of European Integration is the pulling of sovereignty. Sovereignty is a legal concept on which the nation states have been based and implies i.a. that decisions may be taken that concern the individual. When the ECSC was introduced it led to the pulling of that sovereignty from the nation state to a supranational level. For the political scientists, the ECSC was just another form of cooperation, for the economists the EEC was an ordinary customs union but for the lawyers, the idea that a nation state lost (part of the) sovereignty on which is was based was an unheard and new concept.
Not only the past shows the predominance of law for European Integration, also the present. The EU is the largest regulatory authority in the world. The rules that the EU enacts are furthermore the single binding element between the EU Member States and the EU-citizens. We have different cultures, histories and languages but we all abide to the same set of EU rules.
Expansion and deepening goes hand in hand
Contrary to the general belief that expansion (more Member States) and deepening (more integration between the Member States) are contradictory, they actually go hand in hand albeit not simultaneously. Expanding the EU with new member states automatically lead to new areas of cooperation. Brinkhorst illustrates this with the accession of UK/Denmark/Ireland and Spain/Greece/Portugal. The former led to a more transnational oriented EU with an increase in the common commercial policy (UK) together with the introduction of solidarity through the creation of regional funds (Ireland). The latter accession led to the addition of a human rights clause and increase of the foreign policy through the orientation to Latin America an North Africa.
Crises is an element of integration
Crises is a necessary part of European Integration. Nation states favour a status quo, where the cards are dealt and it is clear how the powers are divided. European Integration has not changed that fact. This means that unless there is an overwhelming reason for the nation state to act, European Integration is stagnated. European Integration however is naturally characterized by diversity, unity being a most unnatural situation. What happens in the situation of a crises is that different Member States have different ways of solving it, this diversity of policies creates the need to cooperate for the future, to push forward the European integration in order to create a new stable situation. Without crises’ therefore, European integration would not have been where it is now. And the current crisis will have the effect of deepening the integration.
Supranationalism versus intergovernmentalism
The position of the member state in the EU is twofold: they are both the master of the treaties (only the member states can create something new) and the subjects of the treaties (they have no veto power and are subject to the European Court of Justice). In the day to day work however, the power of the state leaders form the core. It is eventually the ‘intergovernmental’ European Council that decides and holds the power, not the ‘supranational’Commission. The state leaders – together and apart – shaped European integration though their personalities and their wishes to work together as a group. Supranational institutions are needed for the function of the EU but not for the shaping of the EU. The EU is not a super state.