2023.04.06.

European integration and the European Union (EU) through a liberal lens
by Beta Mirena, Borbala Luczi and Emma Horvath

Our topic of presentation is the European integration and the EU’s analysis from a liberal lens as our
topic for presentation. The structure of the display is built into nine principal parts. In this essay, we
are going to outline the essential parts of the presentation by first historically placing the subject and
then analyzing it through the core concepts and key frameworks.

Both liberalism and the idea of European integration are rooted in the Age of Enlightenment.
Rousseau and Kant all thought it would be beneficial to set up an organization of European nations
based on both international law. John Lock, Montesquieu, Adam Smith, and Thomas Hobbs
introduced the ideology of liberalism – founded on the values of freedom, equality, human rights, the
rule of law, free trade, and free market, etc. – around the same time. The Revolutions of 1848 broke
out articulating the same liberal ideas. European integration and liberalism became fully entangled in
the 20th century. The World Wars proved how vital is to establish institutions for cooperation and the
prevention of. Determined to prevent another traumatic historical event, the foundation of the
European Coal and Steel Community (1951) symbolizes the beginning of the EU and the future
decades of collaboration.
Liberalism has three essential types in Europe: classical liberalism (focused on laissez-faire
economics), social liberalism (centered around welfare, state intervention in social economic and
cultural life), and conservative liberalism (combines the economic views of classical liberalism with
socially conservative values).
The EU is not only based on liberal ideas, values, and mechanisms, it also houses in its Parliament
factions that have the above-described qualities. (Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe). The
European Union’s founding documents, the Treaty of Lisbon, and the EU Charter of Fundamental
rights record liberal aims: freedom, security, social justice, equality, free trade, representative
democracy, the rule of law, and human rights.  

Now that we have established the history and the essential features of the EU and liberalism, we will
continue exploring neo-functionalism. Neo-functionalism is the first European integration theory,
developed by Ernst Haas in the 1950s. Its thesis is that all integration is the result of past integration.
Other than Haas, Jean Monnet one of the chief architects of European unity, also believed in this
theory. He thought, achieving integration in one sector of common policy would lead to a ‘spillover’
into other policy areas. One sector where this is relevant is the fiscal union of the countries in the
Eurozone. In 1985 the European Economic Community established the Internal Market Programme in
which tariff barriers between states were removed, this led to more trade between member states.
Then, national laws that discriminated against imports from other EEC countries were removed, and
the freedom of movement was expanded from just the goods to include people, services, and capital.
However, this new internal market was vulnerable to inflation and deflation of the members’ national
currencies, and a demand for common currency was born. The creation of the Economic and
Monetary Union between 1992 and 2002 followed, accompanied by the establishment of the euro.

To prove the EU bases its procedures on liberalist foundations, we will explore the Eastern
Enlargement. According to EU treaties, any European state that subscribes to the liberal values of the
EU may apply to become a member state. The CEECs in the time of negotiations invoked this
membership norm to persuade the reluctant member states that feared the costs of enlargement. They
argued in the name of the principles of the liberal community and agreed to adopt them.These
arguments made it difficult for the member states to reject the enlargement. They would have been
betraying the values and norms of their community. Whether it was a wise choice to accept these
reasons – regarding current illiberal tendencies in the union – is for you to decide. 

The EU has a unique security policy which is worth noting. As a liberalist organization, its emphasis
is on human rights protection, human security, the promotion of democracy, and on the strengthening
of institutions. However, the protection of these areas is full of dilemmas, questionable
implementation, and bureaucracy. Difficult to find the balance between altruistic and strategic moves.

1
 2023.04.06.

In the security aspect, the EU still displays a Wilsonian view of internationalism it practices
preventive and proactive diplomacy to keep the dark side of globalization away from its territory. The
EU is essentially practicing soft power by attracting cooperation through peaceful diplomatic
strategies like offering economic aid or appealing to shared values. The dilemma in the past decade
was whether the use of soft power is enough or if there should be something more concrete or
tangible.

After this bypass, we will return to the inspection of another theoretical framework, liberal
intergovernmentalism. Liberal intergovernmentalism – by Andrew Moravcsik - is focused on how
intergovernmental negotiations propel EU developments. LI views states as the principal drivers of
integration. They make decisions based on self-interest and economic gains. These rational decisions
become negotiations, then bargaining, and the result depends on the power relations between member
states. States represent the preferences of domestic social groups which is the reason why it is a liberal
framework. To establish commitments, policies, and institutions (for behavior influencing) states pool
their sovereignty. The best example of LI is the Common Agricultural policy created based on the
French agricultural sector’s arguments. 

The last topic to review are the current issues of the EU that might concern its liberal future. First, we
will touch upon the elements of the Eastern enlargement and then Brexit. Hungary and Poland in the
1990s led eastern Europe in the economic shock therapy, but in cultural areas, they chose a more
conservative course. Their transition from a communist country to a democracy was essentially driven
by “copycat liberalism” as they could not adopt the cultural and social norms of the West they would
only pick up those liberal ideas and mechanisms that they wanted to and easily could enjoy (mostly
economic). The shame and resentment of the unsuccessful social transition fueled a new populist
political movement. This ideology gained momentum in the last few years thanks to politicians like
Viktor Orban or Mateusz Jakub Morawiecki. Both parties have accepted policies that -according to
the EU – violate the Charter of Fundamental Rights. However, as there is no example of throwing a
member state out of the union – even if it violates the principal values of that – they are exercising the
right to withhold subsidies.
The process of Brexit was projected by the media as a loss to both the UK and the EU. However,
many think the UK was a roadblock in political integration, and now the EU has a newfound
opportunity for further political integration. It might be time to reform the EU’s defense and security
policies and build trust and cooperation between members. Nevertheless, to restructure certain areas,
there would have to be cohesion, and the conflict between the populist and globalist politicians of the
EU needs to be resolved. The solution probably would be cooperation and discussions without
pushing each other’s agendas. 

To conclude, we are going to summarize our final thoughts on the topic. The EU foundation relies on
two centuries' worth of cooperation and negotiations catalyzed by liberal ideas. Membership requires
the support of the same liberal mechanisms and values. Cooperation in the EU can be analyzed by
both Neo-functionalism (spillover effect) and Liberal intergovernmentalism (bargaining). The
organization's future hangs in the balance for various reasons: the uncertainty around its security
policy, and the dilemma of whether soft power is enough to protect itself both regarding conflicts
between political groups (populism, globalism) and the dark side of globalization (territorial
protection).