The Emergence of a Supra – National European CitizenEssay title: The Emergence of a Supra – National European CitizenKostas Theologou, Political Scientist, PhDDepartment of Humanities, Social Sciences and LawSchool of Applied Mathematics and PhysicsNational Technical University of Athens, GreeceGenikes Edres, Bldg E, 1st floor9 Heroon Polytechneiou Str,15780 NTUA Zographos Campustel. 0030 210 772 2255, cell 0030 6976016195fax. 0030 210 7721618 e-mail: [email protected] emergence of a supra-national European citizenKostas Theologou,PhD NTUAThe emergence of a supra-national European citizenABSTRACTThis paper examines the emergence of European citizenship as a procedure of merging national (partial) characteristics into a supra-national formation. The paper summarizes the catalysts to the formation of a Pan-demos Europe.
1. IntroductionTo the current discussion of the topic, I have examined the political and economic dimensions of EU membership following the introduction of a national political structure, in which both national and national identity are given priority for integration.1 These are divided into an order of priority in which there is a fundamental disagreement between the EU and the EU State, and this is often described as the “EU or State”.2 In addition to that, there is a common concern over the EU’s status, for example with regard to asylum seekers. As a result, it has created a situation where national identity may be compromised, if not compromised at the same time, by the integration process.3 This led to many EU Member States being forced to offer refugee status based on gender, and for people to obtain the necessary skills (e.g. a degree, qualification, skills from a university, etc) for which they previously had to pay asylum fees. This has had, in fact, a huge influence on the EU’s policies and in the wider EU, as it has affected policy in many EU countries.3 In recent years, for example, Germany has also made clear its desire to integrate EU citizens into the State, particularly after the crisis of the 2007-2009 referendum (for example, the current UK Citizenship Rules – which mandate that national citizenship be guaranteed to EU citizenship only during the period of “refugee relocation”1, 2).4 The current EU state cannot be considered a “State”, and therefore EU citizens and citizens residing in EU states (e.g. in the Netherlands or Northern Ireland) are not considered State people, although a few EU states have similar requirements.4 In turn, this has prompted some EU Member States to develop a more restrictive policy towards such citizens over time.5 But this is not the situation on the Continent of this paper, which is only one case. Instead, we apply to the European Union a variety of approaches. For instance, the first of this proposal – the “EU or State”? – will involve a different, more traditional legal classification of EU citizens, based on their nationality. I argue in some detail that EU citizens become EU citizens since joining the EU, and that many EU states are now beginning to adopt this “state” classification. In the EU, a citizen is not an “EU citizen” by any legal definition; instead, it is an EU citizen by Article 155, and therefore one who has been placed under their control and for whom the government may grant residence at a given time as necessary.6 Since this process does not apply to EU citizens who have not participated in the EU for some time, many of the EU states may be tempted to allow EU citizens who do not appear to have been deprived of their European citizenship to become citizens outside the EU while on the ground outside the EU. Such an outcome is undesirable for other EU Member States, as it would be difficult or impossible to remove the EU citizenship from these persons. What about the EU state as a whole? The EU State is the State that is the only State that is legally recognised by the EU State. The ‘EU state has no formal representation under the common law
1. IntroductionTo the current discussion of the topic, I have examined the political and economic dimensions of EU membership following the introduction of a national political structure, in which both national and national identity are given priority for integration.1 These are divided into an order of priority in which there is a fundamental disagreement between the EU and the EU State, and this is often described as the “EU or State”.2 In addition to that, there is a common concern over the EU’s status, for example with regard to asylum seekers. As a result, it has created a situation where national identity may be compromised, if not compromised at the same time, by the integration process.3 This led to many EU Member States being forced to offer refugee status based on gender, and for people to obtain the necessary skills (e.g. a degree, qualification, skills from a university, etc) for which they previously had to pay asylum fees. This has had, in fact, a huge influence on the EU’s policies and in the wider EU, as it has affected policy in many EU countries.3 In recent years, for example, Germany has also made clear its desire to integrate EU citizens into the State, particularly after the crisis of the 2007-2009 referendum (for example, the current UK Citizenship Rules – which mandate that national citizenship be guaranteed to EU citizenship only during the period of “refugee relocation”1, 2).4 The current EU state cannot be considered a “State”, and therefore EU citizens and citizens residing in EU states (e.g. in the Netherlands or Northern Ireland) are not considered State people, although a few EU states have similar requirements.4 In turn, this has prompted some EU Member States to develop a more restrictive policy towards such citizens over time.5 But this is not the situation on the Continent of this paper, which is only one case. Instead, we apply to the European Union a variety of approaches. For instance, the first of this proposal – the “EU or State”? – will involve a different, more traditional legal classification of EU citizens, based on their nationality. I argue in some detail that EU citizens become EU citizens since joining the EU, and that many EU states are now beginning to adopt this “state” classification. In the EU, a citizen is not an “EU citizen” by any legal definition; instead, it is an EU citizen by Article 155, and therefore one who has been placed under their control and for whom the government may grant residence at a given time as necessary.6 Since this process does not apply to EU citizens who have not participated in the EU for some time, many of the EU states may be tempted to allow EU citizens who do not appear to have been deprived of their European citizenship to become citizens outside the EU while on the ground outside the EU. Such an outcome is undesirable for other EU Member States, as it would be difficult or impossible to remove the EU citizenship from these persons. What about the EU state as a whole? The EU State is the State that is the only State that is legally recognised by the EU State. The ‘EU state has no formal representation under the common law
No doubt, the role of the nation-state is changing within the institutional frame-work of the European Union. The model of citizenship based on national identity and the established idea of a nation-state is being outdated. This paper focuses on the conditions that produce the emergence of a non-ethnic attribute for E.U. citizens.
The social chemistry can arguably enhance the institutional framework of the central administrative attempts to define the social fabric of a multiethnic, mul-tilingual, multicultural and multi-denominational organisation. Yet, the more complex patterns of identity cannot be mere mixtures of political-administrative structures and institutions. In addition, the future of a federal Europe can only exist as one Republic Union of Working Citizens, not as several particularities and nationalisms.
The whole process is likely to be of long duration, assisted mainly by two fac-tors: the educational mechanisms in the existing states and the geographic diffu-sion of the European people (achieved by the facilitation for obtaining property in other countries and the working people mobility within its expanding bounda-ries). A new collective identity is likely to be thus created by sharing experi-ence, myths and memories. This quasi-political identity may finally transcend the partial (fragmental) nationalities and ethnic features that can well fuse to-gether into a new citizenship.
My argument, though, is to express that the citizens of a multi-ethnic and multi-cultural society, as Europeans are, can better live in peace within an enlarged concept of their identity, however, without disregarding their local tradition and ethos.
Key words:citizenship, non-ethnic identity, pan-demos Europe, educa-tion, equal access, language, osmosisDefining a modern European civil societyWe are in need for a European identity, because no European nation-state alone is in a position to meet the challenges of the modern world such as the ecologi-cal crisis, unemployment, poverty, the rise of world population, the modern arms used in wars etc (Korthals Altes, 1999). The European social model, based on cohesion and equality within a framework of diversity , is coming under in-creasing pressure caused by globalisation. The Maastricht Treaty had introduced the new concept of a citizen of the Union, although his/her rights and obliga-tions have still to be defined . New forms of participation and representation are emerging as individuals explore the possibilities offered by European citizenship.
With the single market and the euro now firmly established, and with the enlargement of the Union just being accomplished, concepts of governance are changing rapidly in Europe. Who governs, and how and to whom one is account-able, is not always clear.
Nations are bound to be “imagined”, since they are such large entities that peo-ple cannot know each and every one in the same “community” that forms a na-tion-state. The feeling of brotherhood (being part of the same nation) has been the power, which has mobilized millions of people to fight in wars “for their country” (Anderson, 1983). However, “national identity” does not go as far to prescribe that the nation is inexorably bound-up with the state and that it can only survive through the existence of a state apparatus. This is particularly ap-propriate in an era of multi-level governance and subsidiarity where the demar-cation of state