The European Union, a unique and innovative project that must reinvent itself

Another anniversary has passed since May 9, 1950, when the "Schuman Declaration" began a unique, complex, and contradictory process in the world, with broad and profound influence. Through this diplomatic political declaration, which involved placing a strategic resource (coal) under a "common authority," two historically hostile countries, France and Germany, put an end to their conflicts and recognized the need to work together for the well-being of their peoples.

With the birth of the European Economic Community, later the European Union, that utopia of philosophers, politicians, and writers of a united continent began to become a reality, first with an economic purpose and then slowly moving toward a community space with a single social and political identity.

What's extraordinary about this phenomenon, we believe, is the recognition that unleashed force and exacerbated nationalism, without any framework for containment, were the cause of the miserable situation in the post-World War II era. The utopia/project began to become a reality when it became clear that the aspirations and needs of peoples and nations were not satisfactorily resolved within the narrow framework of nation-states.

Thus, a sui generis international subject is born, which is not a simple process of economic integration, a military alliance, a confederation, or a superstate; it is something more and different, although typologically we can speak of a supranational entity or an economic union.

Along this "path" of advances and setbacks, the Europe of six became the Europe of twenty-seven, with a unique institutional structure that contains and balances the power and differences of all kinds of its members.

The project's success led to a state of exceptional well-being and development, which established Europe as an economic, cultural, and regulatory "power" and a model to follow in certain public policies. It was then that such rarities as the single currency, the absence of internal borders, European citizenship, Community law, and so on appeared. It was then that for many, the "European passport" began to become an obsession.

But today, as in the 1950s, at the height of the Cold War, internal and external constraints constrain and challenge the European model. Once again, internal voices of discord arise regarding the institutional and cultural model. Are European states adequately represented in their institutions? How much multiculturalism can Europe tolerate without diluting its Western and Christian essence? How can it confront a world dominated by exacerbated nationalism and threatening powers? How can it overcome its technological and international competitive decline?

Europe has ceased to be a "beacon" looked to by politicians, states, and ordinary citizens, as a place of democracy and well-being. Today, all eyes are on authoritarian leaders and limited (illiberal) democracies that address social problems through more expeditious methods.

The old continent, with its rich history and culture, which never had a common foreign and defense policy, must make a fundamental decision: to become a player in global international politics, a third player between the great powers of the United States and China/Russia. A role that Europeans refused to accept for decades, under the protection of their American ally. The new Europe must reconcile itself with "power."

A new role, but different from that of the imperialist European powers of the 19th century, a European Union that projects its exceptionality.

They have been forced to do so in part by the invasion of Ukraine and the need to invest in defense, as well as the defection of their traditional ally due to Trump's foreign policy.

Some concrete policies were implemented to escape this existential suffocation : increased defense spending and NATO expansion; rapprochement with the Central Asian group of countries; caution regarding the Belt and Road Initiative; the shift by some European countries to a stance against the trade agreement with Mercosur; the offer of zero tariffs on trade with Washington, etc. Concrete steps, but insufficient.

The world has changed radically. The "great American republic and democracy" is no longer the same, and the Euro-Atlantic consensus is unraveling. There is a powerful attraction to authoritarian and nationalist means to resolve national problems. China constitutes a universal paradox, with its extraordinary economic development and international reach under an authoritarian one-party regime, when democracy has always been associated with economic development.

For all these reasons, the old/new Europe must reinvent itself, to return to what Montesquieu, Voltaire, Victor Hugo and its founding fathers, Schuman, Spinelli, Monnet, Adenauer, etc., envisioned: not as a utopia, but as a concrete reality, conscious of the need for "power," renewed and still valid for the benefit of the world.

* The author has a degree in international relations.