What Doesn't Kill EU Makes EU Stronger

The history of the European integration process has shown us several times that it’s the perception of real challenges that makes the integration process progressing. Without a significant challenge, the mission of the integration process may become unclear for the Member States (or for a part of them), and that can endanger the integration itself, potentially leading to partial or full disintegration. Of course, serious challenges can be conceived as dangerous; however, each challenge faced and survived can strengthen the EU and thus contribute to its development – the whole history of the EMU (including not only the developments of the recent years, but also the turbulences and the way out of them in the 1970s) is one of the most tangible examples of this. Today, the EU faces a number of challenges – among others: lack of sufficient social and territorial cohesion, mass immigration, negative demographic developments, questionable competitiveness, no real strategy regarding the numerous problems of the EU’s neighbourhood. These challenges could be best perceived as an opportunity – an opportunity to reform (or, if necessary, radically change) the traditional policies and approaches in these fields. In order to arrive to that point, it is necessary to open an EU-wide political discussion of these topics and to set priorities – of course, this will surely need some compromises. On the basis of the results of such a process, the instruments (and not only the financial instruments) should be added to the policies at the corresponding (local, regional, country-, country-group, EU-) level. It is clear that the approach proposed above shows us the image of a multi-speed integration. For those who are afraid of such a process, it must be emphasised that at the present depth of the integration process and with so many and so different Member States this is the only realistic way to move ahead. Multi-speed integration has already become reality, but this is not a tragedy – the tragedy would be the end of the integration process just because of the – unrealistic – objective of the preservation of (the already non-existing) uniformity. (I prpopse this paper for the (proposed) panel: Legitimising EU governance under crisis conditions: Between the classic Community method and new forms of differentiation)