3 ms·

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

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.
      - gmueckl 2y ago
        This take is shortsighted on many levels. Coordination without a fixed framework to do it in creates kafkaeque negotiations where every involve party can fight tooth and nail for their pet rule or exception and everything slows down to a crawl. A government like structure sets clear enough rules and processes that force results. European defense structures rely on economic collaboration as well. There are lots and lots of multilateral weapon R&D programs that are only really possible because cross border collaboration between the involved companies is trivial because of the EU.
        lukan 2y ago
        "kafkaeque negotiations where every involve party can fight tooth and nail for their pet rule or exception and everything slows down to a crawl." That is pretty much how I see the EU as it is. Maybe you are aware of the luxory of moving the whole parliament once a month between Bruessel and Strassbourg? And calling my comment shortsighted is just inviting me to return the compliment and further degrade all debate btw.
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.

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.
    - gmueckl 2y ago
      This take is shortsighted on many levels. Coordination without a fixed framework to do it in creates kafkaeque negotiations where every involve party can fight tooth and nail for their pet rule or exception and everything slows down to a crawl. A government like structure sets clear enough rules and processes that force results. European defense structures rely on economic collaboration as well. There are lots and lots of multilateral weapon R&D programs that are only really possible because cross border collaboration between the involved companies is trivial because of the EU.
      - lukan 2y ago
        "kafkaeque negotiations where every involve party can fight tooth and nail for their pet rule or exception and everything slows down to a crawl." That is pretty much how I see the EU as it is. Maybe you are aware of the luxory of moving the whole parliament once a month between Bruessel and Strassbourg? And calling my comment shortsighted is just inviting me to return the compliment and further degrade all debate btw.

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.