Do we really want to avoid a minnow’s fate for Europe?

It is forbidden to talk about the European institutions. You cannot review the current policies. In no way you will make suggestions regarding the European Union budget. Thus begins a diabolic request, made by the European Council in December 2007 to a group of experts to analyze the challenges that the EU will face in 2030. The group was chaired by Felipe González, former Spanish Prime Minister, and composed of Vaira Vike-Freiberga, Mario Monti, Lech Walesa, Joschka Fischer, Jacques Delors, and André Sapir among others. Their task was formidable because, in addition to the aforementioned restrictions, the group was not endowed with funds with which to hire additional experts to research the specific areas of the report.

If you cannot review the rules of the game, suggest new policies or deliberate about the European financial resources, i.e. everything that matters, how is it possible to put forward any recommendations to cope with the challenges the EU will face in the long term? Under those circumstances, it is surprising that the Group of Reflection came back in May 2010 with such a remarkable, ambitious and far-seeing report: Project Europe 2030, Challenges and Opportunities.

Stripped of the complacent Euro-jargon common to these types of documents, the report isn't reassuring regarding either the current social, political and economic state of Europe or its prospects. The difficulties shaping the present and the future of the Union and its citizens are described as follows: “a global economic crisis; States coming to the rescue of banks; ageing populations threatening the competitiveness of our economies and the sustainability of our social models; downward pressure on costs and wages; the challenges of climate change and increasing energy dependence; and the Eastward shift in the global distribution of production and savings. And on top of this, the threats of terrorism, organized crime and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction hang over us.”

Confronted with these problems, the Union and its Member States could become “an assertive global actor or, alternatively, [...] slide into marginalization, becoming an increasingly irrelevant western peninsula of the Asian continent.” To achieve the former, the EU needs not renounce economic efficiency at the expense of social equality or vice versa. Precisely, the group stresses the fact that both of these pillars are necessary for the Union to attain the objectives in its report, stating that, “if the EU does not adjust to the needs of the global economy, there is a real danger that Europe’s relative decline may become absolute”, but also that for the Union to become “an effective and dynamic global player, it will also need to shift solidarity to the heart of the European project.”

The report makes policy recommendations dealing with the short, medium and long terms, and its very comprehensive in the scope of the areas it tackles. The EU leaders should continue adopting measures to overcome the current crisis, but with an eye to future reforms, it states. Strengthening the economic governance of the EU, as well as reforming our financial institutions, is urgently needed. The report reminds us that human capital is essential to compete in the global economy, warning us the EU is losing this race. Finally, implementing a common energy policy, maintaining the leadership in the fight against climate change, tackling the demographic challenge with a variety of social and labour reform policies, completing the single market and improving tax coordination are among the overriding decisions the EU is facing, without forgetting the need to narrow the gap between the citizens of the Union and its institutions.

To be sure, the document seems at times to make excessive demands on the European institutions (in particular if we consider the political and economic consequences of the current global crisis), and to pursue mutually exclusive goals. In this regard, it is more wishful thinking than a framework for action. On a different note, and despite the international stature of the drafting Committee, the report will likely suffer the same fate as the scores of other landmark documents the EU has produced over the years -- cold storage.

However, many of these objectives could be achieved if they were matched with enough effort and coordination on the part of the European leaders. Precisely, in these days in which the political focus is being consciously transferred away from the European institutions and back into the national realm, and in which selecting not the best people to carry on the European project but the most convenient ones for the ambitions of the national political elites has become customary. If I had to pick out a single obstacle for the recommendations included in the report to materialize, I would choose the lack of political will among European leaders. The group affirms right at the outset that the “new compact between the European institutions and economic and social actors, and between different levels of power – national, regional and local [...] calls for strong political leadership,” and that “[t]he EU is more than a common market. It is also a Union of values. With the support of the citizens of Europe the EU can lead efforts to address major global challenges. Confronted by a crisis which they did not create, our citizens will only renew their belief in the European project if their leaders are honest with them about the scale of the challenges ahead, and if they are called upon to make efforts comparable to those that brought prosperity to Europe after the Second World War.” Efforts, I would add, even more necessary on the part of the European leaders. Though the group was explicitly forbidden from making proposals for changes to the current state of affairs, here is one demand the European leaders will find difficult to hide from if they are serious about making Europe a main global player in the years to come. You may say it louder but not clearer.

Francisco Beltran

Researcher, Institute for European Studies, University of British Columbia