Why are there FOUR EU Presidents?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 14 січ 2023
- The EU has four presidents, but no leader. Unlike in Member-States, European citizens can't point to one single individual we can all agree is our representative on the world stage. In this video, we cover the four presidents of the EU institutions and try to find which one is best suited to be called the "leader of the EU"
Relevant Videos:
Is the EU Democratic: • The EU is NOT Democrat...
Is a Federal EU like the United States Inevitable: • A United States of Eur...
An EU Army will beat China and Russia: • An EU Army can challen...
Resources
Source 1: Consilium European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen ec.europa.eu/commission/commi...
Source 2: European Union, Presidents
european-union.europa.eu/inst...
Source 3: Consilium The Council of the European Union, The President’s Role
www.consilium.europa.eu/en/eu...
Great job with this. The EU does a terrible job at communicating itself to Europeans, and you are doing a greatt job at educating all of us in how the system works.
They should take example from the USSR, its older brother.
@@SP95 The EU is democratic, the USSR were a dictatorship. So your comparison make no sense.
@@GP950mAh Yes because last time it was socialism through dictatorship now it's socialism through democracy, cool.
@@SP95 Lol no, the EU is based on a free market economy. Not surprising that the far-right nationalist doesn't even have basic knowledge about the subject.
@@GP950mAh So does socialist China, which makes you a liar.
Keep your fallacies and your far-right neighbors for yourself, even them are fond of socialist values like the EU.
Another masterpiece. All of us Europeans need this channel more than you can imagine, so thank you for your hard work.
Thanks Forza. As I've said before, great to have you onboard as one of my first subscribers! Hope all is well
I think he's actually trying to talk about the citizens who's countries are apart of the EU @@phillipbanes5484
The EU is better off without a supreme leader. The EU is not a country, it's a collaboration and has representatives, not leaders.
Love the channel. One of the big issues I've always had with the EU is the lack of good media coverage. Videos from this channel are a great step in the right direction.
Thank you. Let us know if you have topics you want videos on or if there is anything we can improve. Great to have you onboard
So clearly explained! If you have to choose just one leader, I think you'd have to say the Commission President. After all, when you see a lineup of world leaders, like a NATO summit, you'll often see Ms von der Leyen standing among them. Come to think of it, maybe you should do a video about why the EU Commission president attends NATO summits?
Because the EU and NATO are advancing their partnership
@@abobanger9054 Yes, but Ms von der Leyen is not a head of state or government. I understand the geopolitics of it, but it still seems odd to me.
@@FredoRockwell it's npt odd, who else would do it? Scholz? Macron? They are supposed to represent their countries not the EU as a whole while von der Leyen has been defacto leader of EU until now
@@abobanger9054 I don't find it odd the EU has a representative at the summit at all - I should have been clearer. Lots of international organizations have some representatiion at NATO summits I'm sure. What I find odd is that that, as the representative of an international organization that includes some NATO members and many non-NATO members, she is afforded the same status as a national leader of a NATO member at a major protocol set piece. There are other international organizations that also have relations with NATO. Some of them will have members who are members of NATO (examples of this are APEC, the Nordic Council of Members, and the OAS). None of those international organizations have leaders in these photos calls - nor does this seem plausible. To me this indicates that there's ambiguity when it comes to the EU's status on the international stage, which I think is possibly unique, and therefore interesting, and perhaps worthy of a video in future.
NATO is EU Common defence. We like it or not.
In France, european elections barely ever mention european issues, and if ever, only superficially (and in a populistic way obviously). I think the best way to finally put the union in the center of the debate would be to elect the head of the european commission by direct universal suffrage. Of course in this perspective I still would see the candidates nominated by heads of state.
I understand this is a big risk, and now is probably not the time though...
double like 👍👍for the comment and for "Center" (which infuriates Brexiters)
Il est vrai qu’elles sont énormément négligées
Thank you for the clear explanation. IMO the president of the EC is the closest we have to a sort of "president of the EU", although I would love to see more citizen involvement in the election process.
I think that's right, the EU Council is the Executive so the president of the Council should be regarded as the leader not delyon?
President of the EU Commision = Head of Executive = e.g. Bundeskanzler of Germany
President of the EU Parliament = Head of Legislative = e.g. Bundestagspräsident in Germany
President of EU Council = Head of the Chamber of States = e.g. Bundesratspräsident in Germany
Best explanation so far...
And I would probably say Sweden equals temporary Bundespräsident of Germany in this analogy.
He has a representative role of all germans on one side (outer role) and 'neutral guiding' role on a layer beyond all parties (inner role) pointing out in his speeches, which 'social' topics are considered needing to be discussed in the community in his opinion (and therefore stimulate discussions about unnamed political changes). As Sweden sets the EU meetings and invites, they can 'guide' on which topics the discussions are about, but with no exclusive power of decision making by themselves.
When it comes to the outer role (representing) of the Bundespräsident, i guess this is shared between the 3 presidents of the EU, depending on who they are currently talking with and what they are talking about.
So the EU system is more familiar with the german system instead of others, where the 'leader' (sole president) has more power of decision making, like in the U.S. or France.
In other comments there is a discussion about the different wordings for prime minister and the german chancellor and I have the feeling some would equal them in 'any case', just another expression for the same position. But that is not the case, as there is another share of power between President Macron and Prime Minister Borne against Bundespräsident Steinmeier and Bundeskanzler Scholz.
Yes, both Prime Minister Borne and Bundeskanzler Scholz are the head of their councils, but Bundeskanzler Scholz also has the socalled "Richtlinienkompetenz" which Borne does not have. In France, this 'policy competence' is granted to the president (Macron) as far as I understood. That's why Scholz meets Macron more often than Borne. In the US there is no position of prime minister and the president is also accountable for this kind of duties as far as I know/understand.
In the UK the king has the role of head of state like Bundespräsident (no direct politicial influence, elected by birth not democratically), but here Prime Minister Sunak has the policy competence and the chancellor in the british council is the Chancellor of Exchequer who is the head of Treasury, which elsewhere is called the minister of finance AND economy - the surely most important and powerful position(s) within the council itself.
BTW: In Germany there is a ranking of ministers/ministries (and list of stand-ins) published on governmental website protokoll-inland dot de, where positions begin with minister of economy, followed by minister of finance, followed by the minister of the interior, etc. While the minister of economy stands-in for the chancellor AND minister of finance, the minister of finance stands-in for the minister of economy and so on.
So what is my conclusion?
Political systems are as different as the communities they are made for. I don't really see a sense in trying to equalise them or judging on the wording of titles.
The EU is not (!) designed like the US. If it is good or bad/better, I don't know and would not judge here.
You may find more similarities to Germany (federal institutions, chambers, positions, etc.), so it has no leader (in terms of power) like 'the' President of the US. The power is more shared across multiple positions. In the case of 'policy competence' Ursula von der Leyen as President of the EU Commission (head of executive) should be seen as nearest powerful to the US president, the same as Bundeskanzler Scholz for Germany.
Is there a german conspiracy to overwhelm the other EU members by 'giving' them our political construction?
I don't think so! It's just more similar designed as Germanys construction because it's a union of countries like we have our federal states with shared power between them and federal government and not a centralized government like in Paris/France.
All parties (countries) were involved in the making and I guess no majority wanted a centralized system and/or (too) powerful leader, so they may have borrowed some ideas from the german system, which itself was definately influenced by the occupiers after WWII! You know, there are differences in 3rd Reich and todays Germany because the allies showed us some disadvantages about concentration of power and leadership.
🟡Council of the EU = the Executive
🟢European Commission = institution drafting and proposing laws
🔵European Council = the US-equivalent Senate
🟣European Parliament = the US- equivalent House of Representative
If that s a Senate what am i? A Vulcan? On Jean Michel Jarre s music. Look up the meaning of senate..its not Pitched up Opel rekord ok
Sort of.
Why the EU have four Presidents?
Because it is not a dictatorship.
Because none of them! Qualified to make any sense !😅 large inept Burocracy!
Urusula is defo the most well known and recognizable out of all of these. The council president I didnt even know who he was.
I love these videos they are so entertaining!
👍
And super informative too! These type of initiatives are very important to make the EU accessible to more people.
Happy you like them
They should just rename the offices for better functioning and understanding.
-President of the European Council should stay as "President" because the position is technically a head of state itself.
-President of the European Commission should be renamed as "Prime Commissioner" because it is head of a government, so calling it in a cabinet of commissioners is understable, like Prime Minister in a cabinet of ministers.
-President of the European Parliament can be known as "Speaker" (or "Chairperson") like in many national parliaments.
So; President Michel, Prime Commissioner Von der Leyen and Speaker Metsola.
How is that clearer?
@@maxmuller445 It is clearer when you already understand the differences between President, Primie Minister and Speaker.
@@mattearl8213 Is there a country other than the UK that uses those titles in that manner?
For everyone not used to them the term president is a lot clearer. It is the heading entity. In my opinion the words council, comission... should be replaced to be more descriptive.
I do like this a LOT. Although the EU Commission is not quite a government. It is like a Civil Service combined with government operations but still subservient to the EU Council and the heads of state. I would probably favour a name like "Director of the Commission" or some such that carried importance but also de-emphasized the sense of governmental control - because I don't really think the Commission has that much.
@@maxmuller445 *"How is that clearer?"* - The title "President" implies power and authority that the positions do not actually carry. The "presidential" roles are mostly just chair-person type roles rather than what you might expect of an EU "president".
Even as a sceptic of centralization, I strongly agree with the sentiment that the European Union neads a desisive leader, elected by the public. As the "Spitzenkandidaten Process" has been far from a success, I would advocate for directly electing the President of the Commission.
The problem is that when the public elect a person, then that person has a "mandate from the people". That is *real* power. If an overall leader of the EU was elected, then that would threaten the sovereignty of the member states. The chosen leader may have gotten elected by making promises that some member states did not agree with. Then you have a clash between the people that elected the member state leaders and the people that elected the EU leader. Who has the people's mandate to make the decision now? I think that the EU Commission is deliberately appointed by and subservient to the EU Council for exactly this reason - to prevent the EU from gaining sovereign power of its own. It needs to operate as a cooperation of sovereign nations.
Why should the eu have a singular leader beyond a purely representative role? I don't really see the advantages and it has a lot of risks asiciated to it, since such a system is quite volotile. A single idiot or evil person elected into power can cause a lot of damage
We have thought about that too. But is that the best way? I am a bit concerned about the polarization it can cause like we see in the US. If the Spitzenkandidaten process is executed properly - then wouldn't you prefer that?
@@EUMadeSimple
Firstly, I think that the parliamentary system is an inherently flawed method to elect the head of government as voters cannot be sure what effect their vote actually will have.
Secondly, I do not think that the political polirization in the US stems from direct elections of government officials and have never seen a study which suggests that this is an oberservable phenomenon in other (semi-)presidential democracies.
Additionally, it would be a desireable addition to the makeup of the European Union's political institutions: While the parliament represents the nation's people and the council the member states, the commission would be the representative of the European Union as a whole.
Thanks for the video, I like that you added your own opinion (and made it clear), instead of simply explaining the legal facts.
We will continue that format in the future :) thanks for the comment
I agree with your opinion of Ursula von der Leyen as the "Leader of the EU", she makes constant appearances, trips to Political Allies of the EU, addresses many issues and is arguebly the most active among the other Presidents in the EU Institutions.
Not to mention following the end Merkel's chancellorship Von der Leyen has been described as "the most powerful woman in the world"
Was she elected by the European electorate?
@@dotdashdotdash She was elected by the European Parliament, its members are elected by the European people.
@@dotdashdotdashthe practicality of running an election campaign in 24 languages. The system works well the way it is.
It's confusing like the HRE. You need to simplify this, because this chain will always demand a long process in decisions, and today we have to make it faster to respond threats to the EU. Btw, I'm a Brazilian citizen who believe that LA and EU need to cooperate to make a third force to balance USA and China. No more bipolar world.
Great video. Definitely the Commission President should become more and more the "leader" of the EU. The head of the executive is generally the leader in other systems as well. In fact, the prior Commission President Juncker urged the member states to abolish the position of Council President and simply have the Commission President also fulfill the role. In this way, the Commission President would "have a seat at the table" with the national heads of state and government in the European Council, even if they aren't a voting member (yet). The Council has yet to do this, but treaty reform is on the horizon and this may become reality on the other side of that process (alongside further limiting the veto and enshrining the lead-candidate (spitzenkandidaten) process in the treaties. This would be a big step forward in creating one leader for the EU.
Except that the EU doesn't have 4 presidents. There is one president and the other roles are just that, roles.
You don't say that the the US has several presidents, just because there is a head of the senate. Or you don't consider two presidents in Russia because there are two roles, even when we all know pootin is always in charge.
This is such an essential channel / educational tool for all eu citizens
Thanks !
The Commission should become the Government, with the President that should be at the same time the Head of State and of Government, the European Council should be abolished while the Council of the EU should become like a Senate next to the European Parliament (COEU composed by representatives of the states, while EP voted in a proportional way EU-wide)
Well, it's very easy to figure out. You put one chair in the room, and the first person who takes a seat, is the boss...
These 4 were counted as 4 different entities at the recently concluded "peace" summit in Switzerland. They were counted as "countries". Then each European country was recognized as individual countries.
Best picks at the beginning
My personal opinion:
The European Council should be abolished.
We should instead set up a European Senate and make the parliament bicameral.
The current parliament would become the House in which to elect transnational European political parties (not national parties as now) where each deputy represents his own Euro-party and not his own nation, while the Senate should be constituted in such a way that each nation has the same number of senators (example 3-5 per nation), the senate would be made up of national parties and therefore each senator would represent both his own nation and his own electors. Any bill would simply have to get a majority from both houses. In this way it would be possible to overcome unanimity and at the same time guarantee protection also for less populated countries.
A lot of your reforms are interesting and several are already planned for the upcoming treaty reform, but you must recognize that the current reality is actually a lot closer to what you describe than you think. The European legislature is already bicameral. The lower chamber is the Parliament and the upper chamber is the EU Council (of National Ministers) that represents state interests. All legislation must be agreed upon via consensus of the two chambers. The European Council (of National Leaders) has no formal authority and moreso leads the general direction of the EU by granting it legitimacy from national leaders.
To me it's between Von Der Leyen and Michel, with Ursula winning out. Epic video, the EU should hire really hire you for media coverage and communication, your videos are sorely needed for us citizens to understand all the bureaurocracy
we don't want A Leader, A collective body is the best thing in a modern society
This video illustrates clearly what's wrong with European leadership; the lack of a clear leader and the democratic legitimization of the person... We do not have a clear leader who unites the EU and shows leadership in Europe🇪🇺
0:31 just wondering, is the 🇪🇺EU Council & 🇪🇺Council of the EU the same thing (as they have the same logo)? 🤔
no
European Council, Counsil of European Union and Council of Europe are 3 different thigs !!
They are part of the same entity. As you might know, the government of each state consist of one head of state as well as multiple ministries. Correspondingly, there is one council of head of states as well as a couple of councils of ministers, each concerned with a certain set of subjects, like Foreign Affairs or Economic and Financial Affairs.
Of course, the really important stuff, like changes to the treaties, have to be voted on by the head of states (often unanimously), while councils of ministers can only vote on what the treaties allow them to, usually together with the parliament as part of the legislative process requiring a qualified majority.
I also see von der Leyen as the main leader. I think the reason the EU has multiple presidents is that we're not one country like the US, we're tens of smaller countries, each with its own history, and maybe the idea was to distribute the power and not favor one EU member over the others. I like the idea of the EU-wide voting system, though.
Thank you for addressing this topic. I highly dislike lack of transparance in European Union and the voting system. The voting system is basically indirect. People of one country choose their representatives to the bodies of EU where these representative can be influenced with powers to be. My current position is that the "leaders" should be chosen directly by the citizens so that leaders have to vie for the approval of every citizen and not a select few people
Yes I have made a couple videos on this. There is also a video about the EU president that might be interesting for you :). Thanks for watching and your comment
In my opinion, there should be a popular vote by all the citizens of the EU, so that the candidates can become trans-european identification figures.
Try asking if they want an Eu in the first place
@@garrywynne121880% of us do!
@@Richard1A2B - who said . I call utter horse manure . As the only vote that counted was the cross in the box in June 2016. A vote denied since Maastricht to Lisbon . Because you didn’t want the answer then . Some democrat you are. You had 45 years to prove the pro EU case and couldn’t . Stop whining .
@garrywynne1218 What? Loads of countries have had referendums to join the EU.
@@Richard1A2B - bs. The ones that count never did . France and The Netherlands rejected the ECT and got Lisbon anyhow. 🤷🏻. Or are you trying to suggest that some obscure country such as……? That voted for a national political party somehow gave its consent . If so ., which one and we’re they a net beneficiary or contributing member n terms of budget. Which one?
Since your videos are so short wouldn't they do well as shorts? Maybe you could post them on other platforms like tiktok or instagram reels too
We are working on this . But we like the 3 minute concept. It's short but just enough time to even convey complex topics
So we are going for both :)
sounds like a great idea!
with the best intentions !
what could possibli go wong
The idea of a President..?
No one in the EU even knows the third person xD
Ursula is indeed the leader of the EU but it doesn't mean anything to us.
I think we, the citizens of the European Union, should vote directly for the commission president.
As for the other “presidents”, they should lose their “president” name and call it differently. Too much presidents in the EU!
It's simple: wherever the EU is simultaneously represented by the President of the European Council and the President of the European Commission, the EU is in full power. In the EU there is the so-called diarchy / duumvirate - a system of dual power known from ancient Sparta, where 2 viceroys ruled or the ancient Roman republic, where 2 consuls ruled. The EU is governed by 2 people: the President of the European Council (nominally more important) and the President of the European Commission (actually ruling). It depends on the relationship between these two people whether the EU works efficiently or not. Of course, this has its weaknesses, but on the other hand, these leaders can complement each other if one of them does not live up to the position of EU leader. It is worth remembering that under this dual power Sparta defeated ancient Athens during the Peloponnesian War, and the ancient Roman republic conquered the entire Mediterranean basin. This regime has power, although it looks conflictual.
It is not even close. The President of the European Commission is the leader of the EU. I agree with the video that it would be better if the role had more legitimacy, as it would if it was determined by the EP, but I think it has even more power than it should: the EP should also be able to propose legislation, instead of the EC alone. So, the only thing I disagree with the video is the implicit assumption that the answer to that question isn't obvious and undisputed.
One leader would mean the EU is an empire. So I can see why the hesitation.
Great video as always 🎉
Thank you 🤗
I think there should be a direct election of the President of the commission alongside the election of MEPs
President Ursula Gertrud von der Leyen is our number one leader here in the EU as a whole.
Grande Ursula von der Leyen !!! 🗽🇪🇺🇪🇺🇪🇺
The head of state/governments are the collective leaders of the EU, imho
I am one of the few peole in the United States that pays much attention to it. These videos are helpful though I have a legal background and have pieced together quite a bit.The American press rarely mentions it. I paid very close attention during the 6 months of Czech Republic and can say that there wasn't a single mention of Pter Fiala the entire time. For reasons that defy eplanation, even though BREXIT was several years ago, the British Prime Minister of six week tenure showing up in Prague for a meeting of membership made front page news If it wasn't for the war in Ukraine, I believe that there would have been no mention of the EU summit at all.
I think that the HRUFASP should have been mentioned. The position is one of the few which is explicitly established by treaty. But I would not consider them THE leader of the EU, so the mention would have been for the sake of completeness and then discarding the possibility.
The High Representative of Foreign Affairs/Security Policy (High Representative for short) is just the EU's Minister of Foreign Affairs. They aren't a leader per se, more like another commissioner with a fancy title.
@@falsevacuum4667: That is fair enough. But I do feel that their coördinating role is pretty important.
In my opinion there has to be a lot of rebranding: European Council should be named „European Senate“ and become the official second chamber of the EU and its president could be renamed „Prime Senator“; and the President of the European Parliament should be renamed „Chancellor of Europe“ (because he is voted by the representatives, not the people) and the people should vote on the president of the European Commission, which should be renamed in „President of Europe“. This vote could be an alternative vote (numbered from most favorite to least favorite) and could be held together with the European election for parliament. Every presidential candidate should nominate a vice president in case he doesn’t make it to the end of his turn (pretty much like in the USA).
Does EU recognize UK as 1 head of state?
Ursula, Borell and Michel are all VERY famous to anyone that follows the news, Italian lady somewhat less. Tho speeches of Borell and Ursula are the best for me and i really like listening to them. And two top leaders of the EU for me are exactly those two.
Why do we have to have one person to lead it?
Sure we can make it more democratic, but does it have to be one?
I also sympathise with the rotational sistem
If the leader has limited and balanced powers, democracy is not endangered.
However, a leader serves to bring the entire confederation towards a common direction.
@@cuginidifrancia94 I didn't mean that having a leader weakens the democracy or something, rather I question the need of one leader for a long term
Can we have a common direction without having a common or single leader?
Sorry, it just strikes me somewhat like a need for a cult of personality to unify europ or something
The "leader" of the EU is by design the presideny i.e. a whole country. So the person to look for is the head of government of that country. Any political action of the EU will only come about if the presidency pushes for it.
That's not really true. The country that holds the rotating presidency of the EU Council cannot actually propose any legislation, they can only set the agenda that the Council discusses. However, that agenda is based on the current goings on between the Commission, Council, and Parliament. Only the Commission has the power to propose legislation, though the Council can request a proposal.
This Channel IS a gift !
I always thought it was the Belgian Baldy.
I think it's not necessary to say it's complicated. The president of the European Commission is a bit like the Prime Minister of the EU. The Spitzenkandidaten process should be followed unless the Council or the Parlement does not approve. In quite the same way that both in Sweden and in the Netherlands the leader of the biggest party did not became the prime minister after the last elections.
👍
the naming should really be reformed.
and for crying out loud, the logo for Council of the EU.
it literally is the same as for European Councill, as if naming itself wasn't confusing enough.......
Surely the EU Council is the Executive not the commission?
No, the Commission is the esecutive, while the Council of the EU is mostly a legislative body.
The European council is still the most powerful entity. not the president (Michel) has the power, but the leaders of the (most powerful) countries themselves.
And I'm fine with that. All those leaders are elected at national level. Democratic enough for me. Maybe even the most democratic system in the world
The problem is that these leaders represent (ideologically) only a part of their respective nations. A hypothetical senate could instead bring more representatives for each country, in this way, for example, the Hungarians would not necessarily be represented by Orban.
Yes sp started to take off
Surely the head of the Executive should be regarded as the leader? This would be the president of the EU Council not the Commission. I wouid have thought the president of the Commission shouod be equivolent to the british head of the civil service, he is almost invisible although of course very influential he is not the Exective. Neither is Delyon.
Spectre
Charles Michel is pronounced the French way, something like "Sharle Mishel"
The président of the commission should be élected by the MEP only, just like the primé minister of any country.
Basically Ursula would be Prime Minister of EU.
I am Bangladeshi .we want democracy. Please sanction vote thife awami league prime minister sk hasina.
There is no 1 leader.
The closest there is to a leader is the entire council because nothing can be legislated for without approval from the council.
Ultimately the direction of the EU all stems from the council, everything starts and ends there.
VDF is more like the EU spokesperson in the EU and internationally and leader of the civil service. She can't be the leader of the EU as she has no legislative powers.
bruh.... Brussels, isn't that the name of our leader? lmao
Not complicated, rather confusing and unnecessary! We need a publicly voted leader, probably this won't be von der Leyen..
European Union must support me financially (by billions) in my fight with "Four Putins":
the authentic one, Zelenskyy, J. Trudeau,, & P. McCartney.
Andrew Praiseword,
June 27, 2024
nuk merzitna shum ?
Domnita UE dacă Vaticanul este stat în stat de ce nu are reprezentanți la dvs ???!!!😢translate
It's an oligarchy?
It's just my opinion but I belive a coalition of Northern EU countries lead the EU.
It just used to be Angela Merkel
For the algorithm.
It's more like a split between Macron & Olaf atm. With Spain representing for latin america and a lot of africa recently alongside with french neo-colonies there (because we all know french eco would suck without them exploiting pretty much all of west africa)
I would heavily prefer Macron there, Scholz is sort of a status-quo loving conformist, not much better than Merkel was. Macron has some balls. Of course that is only my opinion, everyone is free to disagree.
Merci de la France
But it soon will have but one leader. And woe betide the entire planet when that day comes.
Wrong. The leader of the EU is a toss up between the French president and the Germany Chancellor
We need to reform this. We need more unity.
Treaty reform is incoming late 2023-early 2024.
@Phillip Banes Better governance and economy, plus more security in an ever more dangerous world of course.
@Phillip Banes, you are not entirely true! What you say is on paper, not in reality. Europe is 26 different opinions.
@Phillip Banes Better governance in two ways: uniformity and accountability. Uniformity in terms of laws. For example, the EU recently passed data protection and charging port laws. If it were up to individual countries, some may implement such laws first like France or Ireland, but others would much later on which causes heterogeneity. That's bad for business and bad for people who move between systems. The EU acts as a forum where when some set of countries have a good idea that idea can be implemented across all of Europe when it otherwise wouldn't be.
For accountability, since countries are very interdependent and operate within the same economic system, they are incentivized to act as watch dogs to each other rather than "not interfering with each other's internal affairs" which is always the phrase utilized by authoritarian countries to commit bad acts on their people.
For economy, there's economy of scale. A free trade zone is child's play compared to the single market etc. that the EU has. With such closeness in economy, there is the most efficiency/prosperity possible. It also necessitates close coordination on regulations etc. which is why EU lawmaking exists.
For security, Nato can only go so far. For example, an integrated EU military would vastly improve budget efficiency and reduce duplicity of weapon systems, R&D, etc. Also, the more integrated EU members are, the more likely they are to put effort into defending each other. Nato's Article 5 is only as good as member states are willing to act on it, and the EU is a vehicle to that end.
time for an United States of Europe.
but with another name
@Phillip Banes I disagree, reasoning as you reason: Canada, Switzerland, Belgium, India and South Africa could not have become nations.
I would argue that monolingual nations are more the exception than the rule, and often where only one language is spoken means there has been linguistic suppression behind it.
But apart from that, it's not a problem to have 30 different languages, if there is a lingua franca that can be used everywhere, in the European case it will be English. Today it is little known in some countries, but things change and very probably in 10 years the knowledge of English will be higher and in every country the average level will be at least a B2.
Europe will increasingly become a necessity as in a world of Superpowers no single European nation will be able to have strong geopolitical clout.
Even the idea that a state must necessarily be monocultural is quite anachronistic (from nineteenth-century nationalism); If Europe became a nation it would be a federal state in which each state would have wide autonomy with respect to the central state, the things that should unite Europe are common defense, convergent foreign policy, economic stability, energy security and mining supply. The cultural differences between the peoples of Europe in no way hinder these objectives.
@Phillip Banes erm I'm pretty sure that America ( i assume your talking about the usa) isn't as homogeneous as you make it seem. I mean it is literally a country formed from various other countries around the world. Im sure there are plenty of distinctive communities around there and yet most people get by pretty well it seems
Ursula vonder Leyen
Miss Madam: URSULA the leader of EUROPEANS GOVERNMENT.
So you say no. ok.
NATO
Qatar
Ursula von der Leyen is the current undisputed leader of the EU 🇪🇺 💙
I’m young enough to live long enough to be able to watch the EU turn fascistic and authoritarian. This’ll be fun.
Joe Biden
You just can't bring yourself to add Honourable Mr. Putin, President of Russia.
nese nuk punoni drejte shum mah mire. nuk vi hiq.
This channel should obligatory in schools
It would be better if the people of the EU could directly vote for a president to run the whole EU. The president could have 4 years in office, and be limited to only 2 terms, similar to the USA.
Yea great UA-cam explainers .. well it looks as mr. Orban is the real leader of EU.. he surely is pulling EU round in the arena 🤷♂️
Why the germans so weak.
A motley crew of clowns
No 👎 😔 no. 😮no 👎 no gad yu nid jnu jang blad vork for ol jurop lkol no pik cojzes
Washington White House
evropte te forte. pah britanin e madhe. evropapa ashte. gjyse
Yea becose USA leads EU