[extropy-chat] EU constitution collapses

[Giu1i0 Pri5c0]

>From the Washington Post
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A62011-2003Dec13.html):
Negotiations on a new European constitution collapsed in acrimony Saturday,
with the 25 current and future members of the European Union failing to find
a formula to satisfy medium-size countries worried that their voices and
votes would be swamped by larger countries in an expanded union.
The main issue dividing the group was the allocation of votes. Under the
current complex system, Spain and Poland, both medium-size countries with
about 38 million people, each carries almost the same clout as Germany, with
80 million people, and France, with 60 million. France and Germany were
pressing for what they called a more democratic voting system, in which all
future EU laws could be passed by a simple majority of the 25 countries, as
long as that represented at least 60 percent of the people living in the
union. But prime ministers Jose Maria Aznar of Spain and Leszek Miller of
Poland refused to agree to any new system that reduced their voting power.
Besides altering the voting system, the draft constitution included changes
aimed at making the EU more efficient and giving it more clout on the world
stage. Among the proposed changes was the creation of the powerful new post
of president, who could meet on the international level with, for example,
President Bush, as a representative of the EU. The constitution would also
have created a European foreign minister to articulate a common European
foreign policy. But since the constitution was part of a package, those
changes are now on hold.

My comments:
[In other words: an agreement was not reached because European nation states
still resist ideas of real devolution of power from a national to a European
level. This has always been the main problem of Europe as an autonomous
political entity: member states insist on making the important decision
independently and accept the idea of European decision making, for important
things such as taxation and defense, only if they can retain a national veto
power. More European integration is only accepted for "less important
things" such as common R&D.
At the same time it is clear that the direction of History is that of more
and more integration and double devolution of power from nation states to
more autonomous regions below, and to a stronger Europe above. It will just
have to take the time it takes, for example the introduction of the Euro as
common currency took ten years and is not complete yet.]