The European "Union"

[NeuroTypical]

The European Union had a lot of lofty goals. If they all banded together, joined their economies, merged their geopolitics, etc, they'd realize various good things for themselves. They also wanted France and Germany to buddy up economically, as their division had been at the root of big European wars.

But we never hear about the EU economy. We only hear about what Germany is going to do about Greece and Spain. That's roughly analogous to here in the US, hearing what California is going to do about Missouri. The UK is navigating it's own waters between Europe and the US, France is looking south to Africa and the Med, Germany is keeping the trade zone going and looking East to Russia.

And then in Syria, we heard about the US response, Canada's response, Russia, China, UK, etc. But we heard nothing about the EU response. All the talk was about France's president's willingness to help, but he couldn't make it past France's parliament. And Germany didn't want anything to do with it at all, until late in the game.

I mean, nothing has really broken or fallen apart - there's still an EU. But has it actually reached any of it's lofty goals at all?

I'm thinking that if "pride in division" is a major goal, then geopolitical might will not be your prize.

[TheMusicTheory]

"That's roughly analogous to here in the US, hearing what California is going to do about Missouri."

I'm not sure it is, though. The United States is a federal republic that is broken into states. The states have a certain level of autonomy but are ultimately under the rule of the federal core.

The EU is a much looser union of independent countries, not states. The EU is not a "country", it is a partnership, and thus isn't really a political entity on its own (nor was it meant to be). It has created an *economic* union, yes, but that's about the extent of it, and countries are free to leave it at any time.

The formation of the EU was all about economics. The goal was never to take away the autonomy of the member nations.

[Guest]

LM, the EU does not have the goal to combine goverments. They still are autonomous sovereign nations. So each country responds to world politics individually without regard to any other member of the EU unless it provides a major impact to the euro.

[NeuroTypical]

No, the ideal of the EU was never meant to be something akin to the US. Yes, the main goals were economic (in no small part because an economically bound France and Germany are much less likely to start wars with neighbors or each other).

I'm thinking the main goals just aren't being reached. How about you folks?

[Traveler]

Hmmmmm - so you all are thinking that the USA today is what the founding fathers had in mind? It is sadly my opinion that no matter how noble a political idea is at its inception - it will be hijacked by political powers and become a detriment to society.

The Traveler

[Praetorian_Brow]

The goals were realized with a single unified currency and binding laws.

[Mahone]

The EU objectives are as follows:

- an area of freedom, security and justice without internal frontiers ;

- an internal market where competition is free and undistorted;

- sustainable development, based on balanced economic growth and price stability, a highly competitive social market economy, aiming at full employment and social progress, and a high level of protection and improvement of the quality of the environment;

- the promotion of scientific and technological advance;

- the combating of social exclusion and discrimination, and the promotion of social justice and protection, equality between women and men, solidarity between generations and protection of the rights of the child;

- the promotion of economic, social and territorial cohesion, and solidarity among Member States.

Source

Which ones do you feel it fails at?

[NeuroTypical]

The 2nd and 3rd items are hefty, and seem to have been realized to a great extent.

The last two seem (to me at least), to not have happened much at all.

Not seeing much "equality", cohesion. It becomes more and more apparent that Germany is on the rich and powerful end of things, calling shots and having sway in things proportional to their stability and strength. And Greece and Spain are on the other end.

Not seeing much solidarity in the EU member's response to Syria. (Or geopolitical movements of Russia or China either, for that matter.)

[Guest]

The 2nd and 3rd items are hefty, and seem to have been realized to a great extent.

The last two seem (to me at least), to not have happened much at all.

Not seeing much "equality", cohesion. It becomes more and more apparent that Germany is on the rich and powerful end of things, calling shots and having sway in things proportional to their stability and strength. And Greece and Spain are on the other end.

Not seeing much solidarity in the EU member's response to Syria. (Or geopolitical movements of Russia or China either, for that matter.)

I have a feeling that you equate social justice and equality between genders as equality in GDP and paychecks between all EU members.

This is not the case.

And the last 2 doesn't have any relation to an autonomous sovereign EU member's response to a civil war of a non-EU member country.

[NeuroTypical]

I seem to be hearing from folks, that the EU was only supposed to do good things for the member nations - sort of a free trade zone. Is this the case?

From what I recall, there was much talk many years ago about unified Europe becoming a rival to US and China, able to project geopolitical might to leverage a lot of good for itself. Avoid future European wars. Things like that. Is anyone talking like that any more? (Apparently not on this thread...)

[talisyn]

If you're interested in the objectives and reality of major trade agreements, this train wreck might be of interest

Trade is good when it's fair - The Hill's Congress Blog