You wanted to know about Europe and the EU?

Great Debates
1

The topic Europeans, Europe and the EU pops up from time to time. I have noted that there are many questions about what this place and supranational entity is really about.

Ever wonder things like:

If I travel in Europe, do I need my passport to cross state borders? Why don’t continental Europeans know how to scramble an egg? What is the purpose of the EU? Will it work? Why the Euro? Why do the French seem to hate the Americans? Is Winston Churchill really our founding father? Are French boys the best lovers, or do they just think so? Do they have bagels over there? So if Paris is the capital of fashion, what is London the capital of? Why is Swedish cooking so bland? Actually, is it? Is it true that Dutch people are almost half a foot taller on average than the Spanish? Whatever happened to Hitler’s remains, could one visit his grave? Traveling in the Greek archipelago, should I bring malaria pills? Finish girls, is it true…? Who are the funniest people in Europe? Is it true that the Italians throw oranges at each other like snowballs at Mardi Gras? Does one get NBC on cable? If so, what’s the programming like? What’s up with all the nudity in Germany? Actually what’s up with all that kinky stuff in general in Germany? Come to think of it where is Europe? No seriously; where is it?

I have also noted that there are answers to be found. Many of the members that are located on this fair continent, and some from elsewhere in the world are frequently piping in an answer here and there, struggling to explain our quirky world and strange customs. I thought it would be a good idea to invite all and sundry to post any question they feel needs answering in one place so that anyone that feels they have an answer can contribute, especially my fellow Europeans and me of course.

Obviously some of these topics can be rather huge and unwieldy, if we get too bogged down we might need to move some topics into a thread of its own. Some of questions might not have a factual answer, but at least I’m sure you’ll get some opinions. In any case, ask away and I hope that ye shall be answered. Try to keep the questions short.

Sparc

2

Why do Israeli teams appear in UEFA competitions?

3

Sparc wrote:
Finish girls, is it true…?" End of qoute.

I think You mean Finnish.:wink: To finish a girl sounds terrible…
What is true…?
I’ve been married to three of them, living together with a dozen, so I should know. Knifed by two of them. Have I missed something???
Btw. Russian girls are better. In every thinkable way.

4

Well Henry, didn’t you just answer the question yourself?

Actually! Three marriages!?! A dozen!?! Knifed!?! It’s worse than I thought. That cold climate and all the Kosken sure breeds some feisty ladies!

The simple answer is that they can’t quite participate on equal terms in the Middle Eastern equivalent due to certain grievances that largely date back to 1948 (I know, I know, you could just as well say thousands of years, but let’s stick to the point).

The same holds true for several other sports and culture events like the Eurovision Song Context and FIBA . Israel actually competes with individuals or teams in many of the European Championship level events. They also qualify for World Cup events and the like together with the continental European countries.

Outside of sports and culture Israel has preferred trading status within the EU, which in many ways puts her on par with the 15 member states. Israel is after all founded on a European Jewish cultural tradition and is thus in many ways much closer to Europe than to her Asian and African neighbors. There has been mumbling about EU membership somewhere in the future, although I would say that this seems rather far-fetched at the moment.

Sparc

5

Who’s going to win the battle on how to shape the EU, France or Germany?

6

Good one Neurotik! Heh!

My WAG would be Germany. On the other hand a more elaborate answer would be both, since they are cooperating pretty strongly due to the opposition to the UK, wherein the real problem lays, what will the Brits do?

My reasoning for Germany? France plays too hard on her national cultural integrity and Germany is winning out in many subtle ways by not claiming any cultural superiority. There are arguments agianst what I just said though, the French are for instance awfully busy EU-fying their citizens if you compare to most places in the union.

I am always astonished when I go back home at how much debate there is about it, the incredible amounts of TV shows that tangentially or directly are EU-ish, to not mention the information campaigns the state and pro-EU lobby rolls out continuously. In Germany EU is more of a de-facto thing and mostly treated as a news and politics issue, rather than a cultural issue.

But this is very much my opinion and impression only.

I think Clairobscur could give some more nuance from a more Francophile perspective.

Sparc

7

So that there will not be any misunderstanding: I was married to these ladies in different times and also lived with the girls one by one.
You see, I have some kind of moral.
And actually it was one knifing, the other occasion it was a scalpel. (We were making a newspaper and it was in the ancient time when there was no computers, Apple was just on its way. The glue and past system where You used a scalpel for cutting).
And there is some moral in the knifing too. Nobody runs to the fifth floor, ring the doorbell and begun to knife someone totally unknown.
Finnish girls knives only out of pure love. And Im happy to say, I’ve been a very loved person through my life.:slight_smile:

8

Thanks, Sparc, I agree with you that the German federal model would be the one likely to win out. I also think it’s the most feasible offering. The main reason I ask is because I was curious what the domestic political ramifications would be if one side were to appear to capitulate to the demands of the other side. For instance, if the French government were to be seen as agreeing to readily to German ideas, if the French people might be less ready to support the EU. The opinion of clairobscur would be most welcome here, as well.

My second question is what of the EDF? Any possibility that such a force might actually come around and be funded well enough to not be a technological/tactical drag on US-EU joint military ventures?

9

Oops, I forgot to mention that my question on the EDF has more to do with the European “street” position, rather than government positions, since I am pretty familiar with those arguments.

10

WAG? If history has taught us anything, it’s this: in a conflict between Germany and France, bet on Germany.

11

So, can Italian wineries call their products “Bordeaux,” “Champagne” or “Cognac.”?

Free trade, right?

Can member states levy tariffs in their own names (and treasuries), or is that done only at the Union level?

What if a Le Pen pulls France out (remember NATO, circa 1957) - does the Union keep chugging along, are sanctions imposed to get France back, what?

And, why all the noise about UK and Ireland? UK eventually joined the EEC, why not think it will eventually join the EU?

More specifically - following the collaspe of the Warsaw Pact, it would seem a historic opportunity to integrate those countries (except, maybe Yugoslovia, but then again, maybe that should be the first?).

Why just the western (NATO) countries?

and what language is the 4th from the top at

http://europa.eu.int/

12

Only merchandise produced in those areas can be called Champagne etc.

Union level for tarrifs.

The uninon would continue.

UK and Ireland are both part of EU.

Not only NATO countries are in the EU (Ireland and EU are not NATO members for example) and discussions are underway with for example Latvia and Turkey.

The 4th language is greek.

13

Maybe this has been addressed before, and maybe it is a silly question. But, do you think the EU will ever be a threat to the U.S.? Or perhaps it already is one?

14

Yes - if only in the manufature of cheese.

15

Adding to the concise and succinct answer by Juggler.

Calling a drink Cognac, Champagne, or Bordeaux when it is not is not allowed in the US either. Just like calling a wine from Sonoma Valley is not allowed if it is from France or Oregon. To call a product by such a name would be to falsely claim origin. To put it in a simpler way Californian wines are only called so when they are from California. If you are wondering Bordeaux is a region, Champagne is as well and Cognac is a valley in the Bordeaux region, where the specific oak trees used to make Cognac barrels grow.

The NATO question I will get back to in address to the EDF question.

The noise about the UK and Ireland. As Juggler said they are member states in the EU already.

The UK has the highest level of EU skepticism in the Union. The UK originally had some good macroeconomic reasons to stay out of the Euro currency, these reasons are now more or less eroded. Public opinion has, however not swung over and there is much nostalgia about the national currency that ties the politicians down.

The public resistance to the EU has also led to the UK being a millstone around the federalization process’ neck. The UK is largely responsible for watering down the European Treaty and the Treaty of Nice. One example is that the UK government drove home that the EU Charter would not be a constitution, meanwhile the public opinion in the UK strongly supports a common constitution, but paradoxically is on the fence as regards a fully federal EU. The UK government negotiated a Treaty of Nice that creates a de-facto federal union, but does not grant us protection under a common constitution. The reasoning is that a common constitution would have to contain federalizing passages that the UK government fears would lead to a public backlash. Meanwhile the effect of such passages is still enacted through the treaty. The UK currently suffers from a divide between government and public on this issue that is unequaled in almost all the Union, except maybe Scandinavia. It is a current and frequent topic of public debate, we have even discussed it at length here at the board, and thus far not anyone, including the anti-EU lobby, has managed to present any founded reasons for the public resistance other than nostalgia, suspicion of the rest of the EU states and nationalism.

Ireland is an altogether different story. The Irish are generally very supportive of the EU, but the Treaty of Nice means some infringements on neutrality for the non-NATO nations in the EU, which are Sweden, Finland and Ireland. The Irish constitution demands referendum on certain issues and this would typically be one such issue. Pending such a referendum the Treaty of Nice cannot be ratified by Ireland, hence it remains in part ineffective. One of our Irish members can probably give a more thorough answer to the question.

Integration of former COMECON countries. Thirteen so called associated states have expressed interest in joining the EU in the future. Ten have filled applications and will join inj the next years, pending acceptance based on that they fulfill the membership requirements, which you can read more about here.

The 10 applicant states are:

Balgarija (Republic of Bulgaria)
Ceska Republika (Czech Republic)
Eesti (Estonia)
Kypros (Cyprus)
Latvija (Latvia)
Lietuva (Lithuania)
Magyarorszag (Hungary)
Malta
Polska (Poland)
Romania
Slovenija (Republic of Slovenia)
Slovenska Republika (Slovakia)

Out of those the Czech Republic, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland and Slovakia are considered well advanced in implementing stable market economies and the democratic principles that are required for membership.

Neurotik, I will post as regards the EDF later.

Sparc

16

Adding to the concise and succinct answer by Juggler.

Calling a drink Cognac, Champagne, or Bordeaux when it is not is not allowed in the US either. Just like calling a wine from Sonoma Valley is not allowed if it is from France or Oregon. To call a product by such a name would be to falsely claim origin. To put it in a simpler way Californian wines are only called so when they are from California. If you are wondering Bordeaux is a region, Champagne is as well and Cognac is a valley in the Bordeaux region, where the specific oak trees used to make Cognac barrels grow.

The NATO question I will get back to in address to the EDF question.

The noise about the UK and Ireland. As Juggler said they are member states in the EU already.

The UK has the highest level of EU skepticism in the Union. The UK originally had some good macroeconomic reasons to stay out of the Euro currency, these reasons are now more or less eroded. Public opinion has, however not swung over and there is much nostalgia about the national currency that ties the politicians down.

The public resistance to the EU has also led to the UK being a millstone around the federalization process’ neck. The UK is largely responsible for watering down the European Treaty and the Treaty of Nice. One example is that the UK government drove home that the EU Charter would not be a constitution, meanwhile the public opinion in the UK strongly supports a common constitution, but paradoxically is on the fence as regards a fully federal EU. The UK government negotiated a Treaty of Nice that creates a de-facto federal union, but does not grant us protection under a common constitution. The reasoning is that a common constitution would have to contain federalizing passages that the UK government fears would lead to a public backlash. Meanwhile the effect of such passages is still enacted through the treaty. The UK currently suffers from a divide between government and public on this issue that is unequaled in almost all the Union, except maybe Scandinavia. It is a current and frequent topic of public debate, we have even discussed it at length here at the board, and thus far not anyone, including the anti-EU lobby, has managed to present any founded reasons for the public resistance other than nostalgia, suspicion of the rest of the EU states and nationalism.

Ireland is an altogether different story. The Irish are generally very supportive of the EU, but the Treaty of Nice means some infringements on neutrality for the non-NATO nations in the EU, which are Sweden, Finland and Ireland. The Irish constitution demands referendum on certain issues and this would typically be one such issue. Pending such a referendum the Treaty of Nice cannot be ratified by Ireland, hence it remains in part ineffective. One of our Irish members can probably give a more thorough answer to the question.

Integration of former COMECON countries. Thirteen so called associated states have expressed interest in joining the EU in the future. Ten have filled applications and will join inj the next years, pending acceptance based on that they fulfill the membership requirements, which you can read more about here.

The 10 applicant states are:

Balgarija (Republic of Bulgaria)
Ceska Republika (Czech Republic)
Eesti (Estonia)
Kypros (Cyprus)
Latvija (Latvia)
Lietuva (Lithuania)
Magyarorszag (Hungary)
Malta
Polska (Poland)
Romania
Slovenija (Republic of Slovenia)
Slovenska Republika (Slovakia)

Out of those the Czech Republic, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland and Slovakia are considered well advanced in implementing stable market economies and the democratic principles that are required for membership.

Neurotik, I will post as regards the EDF later.

Sparc

17

So the US caved on the “Champagne” bit? Unfortunate.

However, this “rule” is a form of favortism (and snobbery).

Not exactly the hallmark of a market economy.

Again, it looks like treaties enabling rules (favoring one side or another).

What is the power (real, not theoretical) distribution between the Parliament (elected) and the Council of the European Union (comprised of ministeral-level members of member states)?

It sounds as if the Parliament is there, but the Council (for now, at least) actually decides policy.

18

No, you’re way, way off the mark here. Various producers of bubbly wine in amongst other places Spain, the US, Italy and Japan all lost their cases to get to use Champagne as label for their product. Their argument was that Champagne had become synonym with sparkling wine and therefore the regional connection had been lost. That is however a load of bull since the Champagne producers in Champagne have always been rigorous in hunting down and prosecuting any copycats. The label Champagne Type Wine is acceptable, but only idiots would use that since is like calling it ‘Not Champagne’. Most have preferred to try to establish their own regional branding as a quality mark.

I don’t get your argument Happyheathen, the fact is that this has not a single thing to do with the EU, the US or France per se. It has to do with the normal rules and laws for branding and marketing, which are pretty similar across the Western world.

Call it snobbism if you like, but tell me then in what way it is snobbism by Florida orange producers to insists that Moroccan orange producers do not get to call their oranges Florida Oranges?

This has nothing to do with EU or US treaties. Things like that are regulated in international trade agreements, copyright and trademark laws and marketing practices.

The simplest answer would be to compare the power distribution to the US. The Council is pretty much the same thing as the US Administration and the Parliament is pretty much like Congress. I’ll insert my standard caution to not confuse the Council with the Commission. The Commissioners work for the Council and are in effect public functionaries while the Council is made up by our democratically elected state governments. The current President of the EU is Anders Fogh Rasmussen, the Prime Minister of Denmark, since Denmark is currently in the rotation for UE Council Presidency. The Presidency rotates between all the 15 member states. This post explains and links to the EU government.

If you ask me I’d like to reform the Council to make its composition clearer and more transparent. Although I am satisfied that it fulfills democratic principles as it is, it is just incredibly difficult to follow who wants and does what in our government and my government suspicious self doesn’t like that.

Sparc

19

sparc

There are perfectly rational reasons for the UK’s reluctance to become too integrated with Europe:

Corruption - many European countries are more corrupt, politically and economically, than one would like (such as Italy, Greece, even France). Of course corruption also occurs in the UK but it seems like their standards aren’t as high as the UK’s.

Instability - Italy have had, what, 50 different governments since the end of the war?

Distrust - You mention Slovakia being about to become a member, I’ve been hearing disturbing things recently about Slovakia’s treatment of Gypsies, there have been some unsavoury comments coming from government ministers. And then there was the fascist Haider in government in Austria until a few days ago. Spain was a fascist dictatorship until as recently as 1976 and Germany…well we all know about Germany.

Democracy - The EU has one of only three legislatures in the world that meet in secret, the other two are Burma and Cuba.

Nostalgia - Britain has a system of law that has served it well for over a thousand years, why change it now?

Economy - Britain’s economy is different to that of the other European countries in that Britain does a lot more trade with the US and with the Commonwealth countries. Britain has strong ties outside the eurozone. Joining the eurozone will mean subjugating those ties to some extent - something Britain is not willing to do.

20

Sparc -

I thought I consumed a bit of Napa Valley stuff called “Champagne” - it has now been re-named “Sparkling Wine” because of EU noise in support of French vintners.
The US could (and, IIRC did, ignore the French compliants - it was the EU who forced the issue)

I suspect I could find other instances in which the EU has cut deals whereby member states have swapped markets - that’s politics. (the wine name story was on the first page of Google hits for “French Tariffs” (a EU-Chile trade deal under which Chilean vintners would cease to use the trademark words in exchange for lifting of tariffs by the EU - in this case, the EU is giving up (a lot of) money in tariff revenues to benefit the French vintners’ marketing efforts).

*Treaties to enable rules to benefit, yada yada *

I take it the Council makes the rules, and Parliament is limited to a “me too” role. Correct?

(in the US, legislation (technically) originates in Congress - the President, however, has no problem getting somebody to submit the bill for him).

Can the Parliament actually deny the Council ratification/approval?

Can the EU discipline a member who misbehaves - say truly massive voter fraud, arresting dissidents, or otherwise violating the human rights clauses of the various treaties?

And, I take it, you are aware that some of the CIS states are re-forming COMECON - is this a threat to western Europe and/or EU?

If Ukraine were to join this new group (don’t remember the name - it REALLY needs a better acronym), could it still be accepted into the EU?

then there are the issues of what to do with new, poor members - even Poland alone could be a huge drain on capital investment, agricultural support, etc.