Could an EU collapse actually save the union? (An EU of different speeds)

During 2^nd half of 2011 there has been a lot of discussion about how the EU could continue in its present form. The crisis in the southern part of Europe, with Greece closest to collapse, discussed on many blogs and forums and Social Media sites, is one side of the problem in EU. The main issue discussed has been the economic part of the crisis, which makes good sense for the countries affected by the failure of local economic policy. As a first step, these countries must look at themselves and their internal structures around financing of public consumption and consumption in general, so that they start to collect taxes from the entire population instead of only from parts of the population. The main issue in EU is not the economic crisis this is the ticker, the crisis is structural as the EU is not a homogeny collection of states, which are at the same level and working the same speed for democracy and economical stability.

If we take Tainter´s definition of when a structure collapse; According to Tainter complex societies collapse because, when some stress comes, those societies have become too inflexible to respond.  Could these societies just re-tool in less complex ways? Tainter answer is - When societies fail to respond to reduced circumstances through orderly downsizing, it is not because they do not want to, it is because they can’t. One reason they can’t is that the public opinion has turned against the complexity due to lack of understanding in the public. When this happens, the cultural difference in the member country and the Central EU has departed so much that it is inventible that a collapse will happen. This is the most appropriate response according to Tainter. EU will soon be in the situation where it has to work with new and simpler structures, structures working in different speeds. There has already been an understanding between France and Germany (old core member from 1957) - that there must be change (see CNN dec.5, 2011 – Europe goes back to the drawing board). They are aware that the EU is approaching a collapse, but their key to solving problems is to tighten to the requirements for financial accountability, instead of looking at the overall structure crisis. The French president took up the dialog during his party congress, where he noticed that our united Europe did not have the same progress and did not work at the same goals and speed. 

If EU must continue to exist, it has to change its present form and it has to occur in a fast and firm way. The new rules, which Germany and France are starting, is only the beginning of an EU in different speeds. In my opinion, we need to divide EU in 3 levels:

• Starting with the “core level” – this is countries who want to have the full package – which are in an economical position of participating in the Euro, who want to have an EU army who want to have the trade union to continue and who want the EU parliament to have more power. These countries will be the dominant parties of the union and should have more power than the rest as they pay more and work closer together. To mention countries in this division is: Germany, France, Holland, (Belgian – due to the fact that the EU parliament is situated in Brussels), Austria, Finland, Luxemburg.

• The “first level” - this is countries participating in parts of the package. The characteristic of these countries is that they have the financial ability to participate in the full package, but have no country political support to participate in all parts of the full EU package. These countries have signed the treaty for a specific purpose, but as the union has developed, they have had national referendums for voting for new parts in the treaty whom the national population should vote for or against. It is up to the core members to decide when these members can take to the next level. To mention countries who would be in this division is: Denmark, Sweden, Great Britain, Italy( do not have the financial strength to participate in the core), Spain ( do not have the financial strength to participate in the core), Ireland ( do not have the financial strength to participate in the core) Portugal ( do not have the financial strength to participate in the core) Poland ( do not have the financial strength to participate in the core)

• The “Second level” – this is countries participating as prospects. These countries are under development, both financial and democratic. They have to prove that they are able to stay in and develop in the union by showing both financial and democratic responsibility. It is up to the core members to decide if and when, these members can participate in the next level. To mention countries who would be in this division is: Greece, Bulgaria, Rumania, Hungary, Czech republic, Slovenia, Estonia, Lithuania, Slovak republic, Cypress, Poland, Malta, Estonia, Slovakia, Latvia, Lithuania.

This is not a static list and level it is dynamic. The dynamic depends on how solid the members are and how well they understand the democratically coherences as well as being able to show a stabile economic growth.

It is a fact that the two big members in the EU – France and Germany – know that change has to take place to prevent a total economic melt down. Merkel and Sarkozy want to start changes by building a;

·         Fiscal Union

·         EU regulators to challenge budget policies of member nations

·         They have not secured a mechanism to ensure that all members are financial sound

The problem with Merkel and Sarkozy´s plan is that it only works, on the financial problems and keep the overall EU bureaucratic structure intact and with the existing complexity. The two state leaders symptoms treats but does not solve the real disease which is the complex structure in EU and the big cultural differences in how you work and pay for a public sector. In their proposals, they even suggest more interference from EU bureaucrats into the member fiscal budgets. What the member nations populations hate from EU, is the control of bureaucrats and what the national assemblies hate is the power taken to Brussels and away from the member nations.

If you want to be a member of a club, you have to decide what you are willing to offer to be a part of the “core” or you just want to be associated with the club and continue your own member plan. It is a matter of trust and believes and local legislations, of how much you can and will offer to stay in the “core”. Member nations have to take these choices in a near future, to continue their membership. Merkel and Sarkozy imply that they can continue with the 17 members who have the euro. These euro countries, is forced to have a common agreement of how a fiscal policy should be governed. We will have an EU of different speeds coming up.