5 ms·

Bit late to the party. Just today on a Germany political podcast (Phoenix Runde) I was hearing the "experts", the crop of people who are largely responsible for

Bit late to the party. Just today on a Germany political podcast (Phoenix Runde) I was hearing the "experts", the crop of people who are largely responsible for the current economical and political under performance of the union, ... musing on what the solution could be to make Europe great again. Their solution? Create an inner union of the EU countries that really matter (Germany, France, Beneleux ...etc). No I'm not making this up. It's not even the first time this idea was floated around. So to me it seems that the EU as a single block is almost finished.

insane_dreamer 2y ago
> seems that the EU as a single block is almost finished you're drawing some pretty far-fetched conclusions here Germany and France have always been the core of the EU (and its founding members).
- dachworker 2y ago
  Euroskeptics used to say that the EU is Germany-first and France/Benelux second and everyone else last. The EU establishment used to deny this. To actually now go out and create an inner union is to validate exactly the euroskeptic claim.
  - twixfel 2y ago
    It’s a podcast and you’re acting like it’s just been signed into law.
    - throwaway519 2y ago
      Critical thinking is not one of HN's fortes. (Arguing about engineering pedantries is, but that is something different.)
  - gmueckl 2y ago
    I have never heard this claim specifically. But it is clear that the rapid east expansion of the EU still causes friction with the other goal of having a tighly integrated political and economic union. Some steps to strengthen the union may hurt the newer member states more than it would help them in their current state. It is really hard to balance this. This is why the inner union ideas get floated from time to time. I don't necessarily think it is a good idea. I am a firm proponent of the EU. In a world where the other major powers are many times bigger than any individual European country, Europe cannot defends its interests when every member country is on its own. There are many issues with the current shape of the EU, but I see it as a necessary step on a path to something better.
    - lukan 2y ago
      A coordinated federation could also work, instead of a centralized union.
      - gmueckl 2y ago
        No, it wouldn't work. The coordination and decision-making processes would be even slower than the EU's current glacial speed. In order to persevere, the European countries must coordinate quickly and act with decisiveness for the next couple of years or risk becoming vasalls to a strong Russia and China.
        lukan 2y ago
        Well, I think to counter invasive countries military ambitions, a military defense pact is needed. Not central regulation of the size of cucumbers. And as for everything else, open borders, freedom of movement, standardisation of infrastructure etc. all can work without being mandated as well, if there is a common interest in them. The EU was designed, when there was no internet. Coordination can happen transparent and quickly without kafkaesk buerocratic institutions. And when there is no common interest to do things - then the EU in its current shape is not working so well either.
        2y ago
  - ahartmetz 2y ago
    I'd say if it has ever been Germany first, that started in the 90s or later. France needed some convincing to agree to German reunification, and they weren't wrong about what would happen next. Germany simply has the largest population in Europe now. AFAICT, Germany is not really seeking out a leading role, it's more trying to avoid it, which has its problems, too.
    - RandomThoughts3 2y ago
      Germany is lobbying all the time for stupid rules to please minority members of their home coalitions (see them trying to torpedo nuclear as a carbon free source on energy in all the European law related to clean energy to appease Die Grünen for exemple) and have realigned themselves strongly with the US since the beginning of the war in Ukraine. Since Von Der Leyden appointment, the commission has been favouring them a lot. The main issue is that the EPP is basically in service of Germany and France lost a lot of influence when most of their deputies joined Renew, a party which is less well integrated in the European Parliament apparatus. That and France failures to even start tackling the structural reforms it needs obviously.
      - ahartmetz 2y ago
        Regarding von der Leyen I would just like to say that she is widely disliked in Germany and "failed upward" into the EU government. Whatever she is doing, it's her will, not that of most Germans.
- lastiteration 2y ago
  The organisation founded in 1957 which is now known as the European Union, originally had six members: Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. Weird how everyone always forgets about Italy
  - insane_dreamer 2y ago
    Fair point. It’s because France and Germany were the driving force behind the Treaty of Rome (despite it being signed in Italy) and well Benelux wasn’t that important.
- marcus_holmes 2y ago
  Yes, and Germany and France have also been open that the goal was always (and still is) political union. For a lot of other EU countries that is not the goal. So there has always been an "inner core". Making that official is not going to be a huge jump, or particularly destabilising.
iknowstuff 2y ago
The fact that you’re basing this off a podcast aside, it seems fine to allow deeper political ties for countries which want it. Some, but not all, want a unified pan-European military for example. Some countries would prefer the EU remain in its current quasi-(con)federation form, but there’s a group which would gladly form a stronger federation like the United States. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_army https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_army https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Europe https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Europe You’ll notice it’s not exactly a clandestine conspiracy lol
- petre 2y ago
  What's the use of a pan EU military when most EU members are already in NATO? Just to add Austria, Cyprus and Ireland to a pan EU force? Rather than that allow a share of EU funds to be used for members' militaries and adopt common EU military policies. Also incentivize EU members to buy EU military equipment using such EU funds.
  - izacus 2y ago
    The ability for EU common bodies to command the new army to defend their other members without being subjected to divide/conquer tactics from US, RU and CN.
pyuser583 2y ago
So the idea of building a military, or encouraging economic growth were out of the question? That’s how it’s done: hard power and economic growth. Every empire in history had those two things. Europe has neither.
RandomThoughts3 2y ago
It’s pretty obvious than enlargement went too fast and is an utter failure. It was mostly pushed by the UK which wanted to weaken the union as a political entity as much as possible. It’s even more true with the euro zone where some members are directly harmed by the high exchange rate. It would make a lot of sense to go back to a smaller more integrated union with the countries which want it and leave the ones which only want the single market be part of a less integrated union. Then again, considering Germany and France disagree about pretty much everything at the moment, I doubt it would go very far.
- realityking 2y ago
  > It would make a lot of sense to go back to a smaller more integrated union with the countries which want it and leave the ones which only want the single market be part of a less integrated union. That option does exist, albeit in a bit of a roundabout way. Nothing is stopping a member country from leaving the EU and joining EFTA and the EEA afterwards. The fact that no country is seriously contemplating this is telling.
  - RandomThoughts3 2y ago
    That only going to a less integrated union. That doesn’t solve the issue of inner members wanting to go faster towards union and being hampered by countries which shouldn’t even be members like Hungary.
NoboruWataya 2y ago
> So to me it seems that the EU as a single block is almost finished. I don't know how old you are but as a European with a passing interest in politics I have been hearing this at least every month for the last ~20 years. And I'm sure it was said long before then. What you need to understand is that the EU exists, and has pretty much always existed, in a constant state of crisis. There is always some major disagreement, some urgent problem. This is just a consequence of the EU's existence as an attempt to unify (in some respects) 27 pretty diverse member states. The EU has survived all of these crises to date. I'm not saying it will exist forever, but I see no reason to believe that the current set of crises will be the ones to kill it. The EU may change but I think it will trundle on for the foreseeable future. Also, there is already an "inner union", it is called the eurozone. Again... constant state of crisis.
- izacus 2y ago
  If we'd get a cent for every doomsaying post about EU in last 30 years, we could probably make our own Elon Musk.

insane_dreamer 2y ago

> seems that the EU as a single block is almost finished you're drawing some pretty far-fetched conclusions here Germany and France have always been the core of the EU (and its founding members).

dachworker 2y ago
Euroskeptics used to say that the EU is Germany-first and France/Benelux second and everyone else last. The EU establishment used to deny this. To actually now go out and create an inner union is to validate exactly the euroskeptic claim.
- twixfel 2y ago
  It’s a podcast and you’re acting like it’s just been signed into law.
  - throwaway519 2y ago
    Critical thinking is not one of HN's fortes. (Arguing about engineering pedantries is, but that is something different.)
- gmueckl 2y ago
  I have never heard this claim specifically. But it is clear that the rapid east expansion of the EU still causes friction with the other goal of having a tighly integrated political and economic union. Some steps to strengthen the union may hurt the newer member states more than it would help them in their current state. It is really hard to balance this. This is why the inner union ideas get floated from time to time. I don't necessarily think it is a good idea. I am a firm proponent of the EU. In a world where the other major powers are many times bigger than any individual European country, Europe cannot defends its interests when every member country is on its own. There are many issues with the current shape of the EU, but I see it as a necessary step on a path to something better.
  - lukan 2y ago
    A coordinated federation could also work, instead of a centralized union.
    - gmueckl 2y ago
      No, it wouldn't work. The coordination and decision-making processes would be even slower than the EU's current glacial speed. In order to persevere, the European countries must coordinate quickly and act with decisiveness for the next couple of years or risk becoming vasalls to a strong Russia and China.
      - lukan 2y ago
        Well, I think to counter invasive countries military ambitions, a military defense pact is needed. Not central regulation of the size of cucumbers. And as for everything else, open borders, freedom of movement, standardisation of infrastructure etc. all can work without being mandated as well, if there is a common interest in them. The EU was designed, when there was no internet. Coordination can happen transparent and quickly without kafkaesk buerocratic institutions. And when there is no common interest to do things - then the EU in its current shape is not working so well either.
        2y ago
- ahartmetz 2y ago
  I'd say if it has ever been Germany first, that started in the 90s or later. France needed some convincing to agree to German reunification, and they weren't wrong about what would happen next. Germany simply has the largest population in Europe now. AFAICT, Germany is not really seeking out a leading role, it's more trying to avoid it, which has its problems, too.
  - RandomThoughts3 2y ago
    Germany is lobbying all the time for stupid rules to please minority members of their home coalitions (see them trying to torpedo nuclear as a carbon free source on energy in all the European law related to clean energy to appease Die Grünen for exemple) and have realigned themselves strongly with the US since the beginning of the war in Ukraine. Since Von Der Leyden appointment, the commission has been favouring them a lot. The main issue is that the EPP is basically in service of Germany and France lost a lot of influence when most of their deputies joined Renew, a party which is less well integrated in the European Parliament apparatus. That and France failures to even start tackling the structural reforms it needs obviously.
    - ahartmetz 2y ago
      Regarding von der Leyen I would just like to say that she is widely disliked in Germany and "failed upward" into the EU government. Whatever she is doing, it's her will, not that of most Germans.
lastiteration 2y ago
The organisation founded in 1957 which is now known as the European Union, originally had six members: Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. Weird how everyone always forgets about Italy
- insane_dreamer 2y ago
  Fair point. It’s because France and Germany were the driving force behind the Treaty of Rome (despite it being signed in Italy) and well Benelux wasn’t that important.
marcus_holmes 2y ago
Yes, and Germany and France have also been open that the goal was always (and still is) political union. For a lot of other EU countries that is not the goal. So there has always been an "inner core". Making that official is not going to be a huge jump, or particularly destabilising.

iknowstuff 2y ago

The fact that you’re basing this off a podcast aside, it seems fine to allow deeper political ties for countries which want it. Some, but not all, want a unified pan-European military for example. Some countries would prefer the EU remain in its current quasi-(con)federation form, but there’s a group which would gladly form a stronger federation like the United States. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_army https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_army https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Europe https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Europe You’ll notice it’s not exactly a clandestine conspiracy lol

petre 2y ago
What's the use of a pan EU military when most EU members are already in NATO? Just to add Austria, Cyprus and Ireland to a pan EU force? Rather than that allow a share of EU funds to be used for members' militaries and adopt common EU military policies. Also incentivize EU members to buy EU military equipment using such EU funds.
- izacus 2y ago
  The ability for EU common bodies to command the new army to defend their other members without being subjected to divide/conquer tactics from US, RU and CN.

pyuser583 2y ago

So the idea of building a military, or encouraging economic growth were out of the question? That’s how it’s done: hard power and economic growth. Every empire in history had those two things. Europe has neither.

RandomThoughts3 2y ago

It’s pretty obvious than enlargement went too fast and is an utter failure. It was mostly pushed by the UK which wanted to weaken the union as a political entity as much as possible. It’s even more true with the euro zone where some members are directly harmed by the high exchange rate. It would make a lot of sense to go back to a smaller more integrated union with the countries which want it and leave the ones which only want the single market be part of a less integrated union. Then again, considering Germany and France disagree about pretty much everything at the moment, I doubt it would go very far.

realityking 2y ago
> It would make a lot of sense to go back to a smaller more integrated union with the countries which want it and leave the ones which only want the single market be part of a less integrated union. That option does exist, albeit in a bit of a roundabout way. Nothing is stopping a member country from leaving the EU and joining EFTA and the EEA afterwards. The fact that no country is seriously contemplating this is telling.
- RandomThoughts3 2y ago
  That only going to a less integrated union. That doesn’t solve the issue of inner members wanting to go faster towards union and being hampered by countries which shouldn’t even be members like Hungary.

NoboruWataya 2y ago

> So to me it seems that the EU as a single block is almost finished. I don't know how old you are but as a European with a passing interest in politics I have been hearing this at least every month for the last ~20 years. And I'm sure it was said long before then. What you need to understand is that the EU exists, and has pretty much always existed, in a constant state of crisis. There is always some major disagreement, some urgent problem. This is just a consequence of the EU's existence as an attempt to unify (in some respects) 27 pretty diverse member states. The EU has survived all of these crises to date. I'm not saying it will exist forever, but I see no reason to believe that the current set of crises will be the ones to kill it. The EU may change but I think it will trundle on for the foreseeable future. Also, there is already an "inner union", it is called the eurozone. Again... constant state of crisis.

izacus 2y ago
If we'd get a cent for every doomsaying post about EU in last 30 years, we could probably make our own Elon Musk.