European Union Forums

[Riri]

What would happen if the EU would actually become the United States of Europe, a federal state etc?
Please give me any suggestions as to what points I could discuss when tackling this scenario.
Many thanks!!!!!

[Sergey]

What would happen if the EU would actually become the United States of Europe, a federal state etc?
Please give me any suggestions as to what points I could discuss when tackling this scenario.
Many thanks!!!!!

This scenario would be realised only in the case of common currency. If Euro-zone would expand to the UK and other EU member states then the United States of Europe project could be seen as theoretically possible.

In this case France, Great Britain, Germany, Italy and other EU countries would cease their membership in the UN.

There are some positive moments. Basque, Catalonian separatists would lose ground. Because they would have to demand an independence from the USE, not from Spain. Problem of Gibraltar would be resolved. It would be a part of the USE. Extremists from IRA would be in a difficult situation because Irish republic as an independent state would not exist. The USE would be an ideal solution to resolve problem of Kosovo if Kosovo along with Serbia would be parts of the USE. And for Belgium it (the USE project) would be an interesting solution. Problem of Macedonia would be resolved - both Greek Macedonia and FYR Macedonia along with some Bulagarian lands would form a solid province - Macedonia as a part of the USE.

What else could happen? The Germans could try to populate former Silesia, Pomerania, Polish part of East Prussia and as a result to change demographic balance. The same could be said about Western parts of Czech republic. The Hungarians would try to establish a zone of predominant usage Hungarian languge in some parts of Slovakia, Romania and Serbia.

Undoubtely the USE would becoume a centre of World economy. Russia, some Arab countries would be Euro-oriented states. Oil, gold, metals and other resources would be priced in Euro. So the USE by its creation would weaken positions of the USA as World leader. So our American friends would try to prevent creation of the USE by all means.

[Andrewz]

Europe can not and will never (at least in the nearest future) unify as one single state. It's impossible due to over 40 different countries, different nations, different languages, cultures, traditions etc. All these can not simply fade away in one day. Still, it is possible that in a couple of years we will have an EU president. Tony Blair is seen as the best candidate. So, why not, step by step the USE could become a reality.

[Big_Becka]

I agree Andrewz - most European countries have only existed over the last few hundred years. As late as 1920s, each small region had it's own language/dialect, costume and customs. Think of the wars we have had! The Union itself is possible, but it will fall apart as soon as someone tries to standardise the language or education system

Why Tony Blair? He is hated in the UK! He is a traitor (to the Labour party and the UK), a liar and a war criminal! If he becomes our president of the USE, he will instigate his "anti-terror" laws and we will all be in prison without a trial

Sorry... Off topic...

[Sergey]

Europe can not and will never (at least in the nearest future) unify as one single state. It's impossible due to over 40 different countries, different nations, different languages, cultures, traditions etc.

Switzerland exists for centuries as a confederation. And Europe could becaome a confederation one day. However, unlikely it would ever happen anytime soon. Different nations, different languages, cultures, traditions... it is not the main cause - look at the USA.

Main cause is a position of ruling elites in big and small European countries. They don't want to lose power, influence.

[Steven]

Why do you Tony Blair a traitor? True, I've never supported his position and attitude for the Iraqi war. As for the rest, I see him as a competent and very smart politician.

[Big_Becka]

Why do you Tony Blair a traitor? True, I've never supported his position and attitude for the Iraqi war. As for the rest, I see him as a competent and very smart politician.

I call Tony Blair a traitor because I consider many of the changes he has made (or lead) to be against the things that Britain stands for. We used to have proud, world class judicial and university education systems. Both have now been degraded.

The anti-terror laws have lead to increased surveillance, and an increase in the amount of time that you can be held in a police cell without trial. You can also be held under house arrest without trial. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4715478.stm The police instigated a "Shoot to Kill" policy for terrorists, which resulted in the high-profile case of an unarmed young man who was shot because he was misidentified as a terrorist by police http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Charles_de_Menezes

In addition, the government has been trying for years to introduce biometric identification cards to somehow reduce terrorism and help catch illegal immigrants. Which brings us nicely on to the immigration problem... Illegal immigrants are often released pending a review of their case, and then they 'disappear' Even legal immigrants from the rest of the EU can claim benefits, including child benefit for their children in another country!

When Tony Blair was first elected, he promised that education would be a priority: he famously stated that his priorities were "Education, Education, Education." He then abolished student grants, and introduced student tuition fees. It was the death of our free university education system, and has lead to a reduction in people from poorer backgrounds attending university. It has created hardship and social problems for people from middle-class backgrounds too, because their parents can influence what course they take and their lifestyle. In addition, illiteracy among school-leavers has increased.

When Tony Blair became leader of the Labour party, he abolished "Clause 4" - this is the part of the Labour Party constitution that commits to the Welfare State. He introduced "New Labour" - and pandered to the rich areas of the UK. Many Labour party supporters see him as a traitor to the Labour Party.

I could write pages about the things Tony Blair and New Labour did! They promised an end to "Boom and Bust Economics" He offered a New Deal to get people back to work, but all that happened was that the metrics used to measure unemployment were altered! Well, young mothers and disabled people are put under pressure to do jobs that leave them worse off, while other people make a substantial living from benefits. Besides, Tony Blair's language and body language are a joke. He carefully uses certain sound bites and gestures, which people find manipulative and offensive.

[Tsp]

Europe can not and will never (at least in the nearest future) unify as one single state. It's impossible due to over 40 different countries, different nations, different languages, cultures, traditions etc. All these can not simply fade away in one day. Still, it is possible that in a couple of years we will have an EU president. Tony Blair is seen as the best candidate. So, why not, step by step the USE could become a reality.

you said --Tony blair as the best candidate --, you are ignorant indeed to make such a crazy suggestion.
I cannot think of anyone worse as a EU president than Blair he would take the EU backwards and make it a puppy dog.
Blair was a disgrace to the UK when he was PM grovelling to a psychotic crazy bush of the US, and lowering british standards by his stupid involvement in the US started iraq war.

[Tamara_Georgia Girl]

That would never happen, illogical topic!

[Andrewz]

Europe can not and will never (at least in the nearest future) unify as one single state. It's impossible due to over 40 different countries, different nations, different languages, cultures, traditions etc. All these can not simply fade away in one day. Still, it is possible that in a couple of years we will have an EU president. Tony Blair is seen as the best candidate. So, why not, step by step the USE could become a reality.

you said --Tony blair as the best candidate --, you are ignorant indeed to make such a crazy suggestion.
I cannot think of anyone worse as a EU president than Blair he would take the EU backwards and make it a puppy dog.
Blair was a disgrace to the UK when he was PM grovelling to a psychotic crazy bush of the US, and lowering british standards by his stupid involvement in the US started iraq war.

For your information, I said that Toney Blair "is seen as the best candidate". It's not my opinion, this is what the EU wants.
watch this

[Peach]

As we can see, the European Union is already a quite complex system. There are too many deviations among the states' opinions, let alone the United States of Europe. It won't happen as we all are different.

[Riser]

As we can see, the European Union is already a quite complex system. There are too many deviations among the states' opinions, let alone the United States of Europe. It won't happen as we all are different.

Agree, especially under crisis conditions it is very difficult to maintain the integrity of Europe. Rich countries think twice before helping poor countries. Poor countries don't like to be globalized because of the crisis. So it's a mutual inconvenient union.

[rars]

United nations of Europe maybe, the confederation of wider europe including Russia and the the baltic states maybe but never will there be the united states of europe

[Guest]

United nations of Europe maybe, the confederation of wider europe including Russia and the the baltic states maybe but never will there be the united states of europe

Well, I'm one of the Russians in here. I have always found the idea of united Europe great. Yet I see some peoples resisting the idea now. Remember voting for the unified Constitution?
And franlky speaking I would not like somebody from outside to rule our country.
Although I'm all for the cooperation with the Western Europe, as close as it only can be.

[Nathan]

United nations of Europe maybe, the confederation of wider europe including Russia and the the baltic states maybe but never will there be the united states of europe

what's the point of creating a wider confederation of states? I mean if other Eastern European are included in EU, it can not be longer called a European Union. It will break very soon because it's impossible to control that big area (if we imagine EU + other Eastern European countries)

[M.Helen]

Today Obama raised the question about Turkey's joining to the EU. I never liked that, when Americans interfere our internal affairs. I think they're interested in worsening the state of things here.

[Terry]

I found a good website dedicated to European justice
http://united-states-of-europe.blogspot.com/

[Benn]

There was a tentative to unite Europe when citizens of two states voted a common European constitution, which would be applied to every EU country. Unfortunately or fortunately it didn't work out as neither France nor the Netherlands backed the idea.

[Laurentine]

There was a tentative to unite Europe when citizens of two states voted a common European constitution, which would be applied to every EU country. Unfortunately or fortunately it didn't work out as neither France nor the Netherlands backed the idea.

Countries that want a common constitution are the Eastern European countries. Why would countries like France and Netherlands like to benefit of the same rights like, for example, Estonians? Estonians and Dutch are different people.

[tricker]

Ireland also seems not to be very happy with European Union enlargement, as they failed to adopt the Lisbon Treaty last year, and due to them the EU extension becomes inopportune.

[EurophileAmerican]

What would happen if the EU would actually become the United States of Europe, a federal state etc?
Please give me any suggestions as to what points I could discuss when tackling this scenario.
Many thanks!!!!!

The United States of Europe was an idea of Churchill, as well as Altiero Spinelli.

This was what Europe's founders wanted, Konrad Adenauer especially wanted this. The passage creation of a European Defense Community and a European Army was viewed as a part of this step. But we know that the french National Assembly killed the project, fearing the rearming of Germany and giving up the French army.

The United States of Europe is still not a reality, and the Member States of the Union are still in firm control of the Union though most of its institutions. Even the Member States have trouble envisioning a United States of Europe and giving up sovereignty to a United States of Europe.

The first thing would be to eliminate NATO and American meddling in European affairs. The "European project" cannot be regarded as finished without an independent-from-NATO defense and security policy. The only use for NATO is to keep a European defense subservient to the NATO ball and chain. The truth is that even Europe's founders though that they needed America's opinion on their "little economic project." Europe has more interests in cooperation with Russia and Africa that the US.