Is EU Policy Eroding the Sovereignty of Non-Member States?

Is EU Policy Eroding the Sovereignty of Non-Member States? Jeremy Rabkin* Ten years ago, the collapse of the Soviet Empire seemed to leave the United States as the last remaining superpower. But the United States is not quite alone. In some respects, the European Union ("EU") now has the resources of a very great power, with an aggregate GNP that is larger-by about 25 percent-than that of the United States. From the outset, some advocates of European integration have seen it as a way of giving Europe greater weight in international affairs, enough, perhaps, to counter the power of the United States. And now, with an expanded and more integrated European Union, the dissolution of the Soviet Union has made Western Europe less dependent on security cooperation with the United States. Today, the European Union does act as a single diplomatic unit in important international forums. In these negotiations, its size and wealth do make it an equal bargaining partner with the United States and a far larger factor than most other states. Americans need to consider whether this new force in international affairs is not, in some ways, a serious challenge to American policy aims and American political ideals. In the long run, the most important tensions between Europe and the United States may not derive from differing policies toward Russia, or China, or the Middle East. The most important issues may arise over something that is fundamental to the European Union's own structure and legitimacy-namely, its systematic program of eroding or reconfiguring national sovereignty. This EU posture has many practical ramifications for US policy. But it also presents a clear ideological alternative. A world more in accord with EU designs will be a world in which national sovereignty has less and less meaning. Is that the kind of world Americans want to inhabit? Some hints of what that world might look like are already apparent in EU-- sponsored proposals regarding international criminal justice, international environmental regulation, and international trade regulation. After a brief look at the distinctive features of EU politics, we look at the way developments in each of these fields have come to reflect the peculiar policy penchants of EU-style governance. I. SUPRANATIONAL STATE OR MEGAPHONE FOR LEADING STATES? Today's European Union is a curious hybrid. Its Member States have their own military forces, exchange ambassadors with other nations, and negotiate treaties on their own. In important respects, they are independent or sovereign states. Accordingly, each augmentation of the EU's authority has been accomplished by a new treaty-essentially, an international treaty-among the Member States. Yet these treaties have built up a remarkable degree of supranational authority over the signatory states. Member States submit to rules and regulations drawn up by the European Commission in Brussels and enforced by the European Court of Justice ("ECJ") in Luxembourg. The ECJ even claims (and exercises) the authority to invalidate enactments of national parliaments if they conflict with European law, in a process the ECJ itself describes as developing "constitutional norms" for Europe. The European Union now claims that citizens of the Member States are citizens of the European Union. EU citizens already have common passports and most of them will soon have a common currency. In many respects, therefore, the European Union looks more like a rudimentary federal superstate than an international organization. Yet in contrast with other developed states, the European Union has only limited and indirect forms of democratic control. The European Parliament is directly elected but has little real authority. It has, in principle, certain veto powers but it can neither initiate legislation nor alter the budget nor even choose the European Union commissioners who are responsible for policy planning and detailed administration. …