The EU’s 55th anniversary of ‘Europe Day’ was overshadowed by events marking 60 years since the end of war in Europe.
Writing here on EUpolitix, 29 MEPs from 13
EU countries explore the path ahead for a EU that emerged from the wreckage of war.
Some contributors from Europe’s new Eastern member states note that the end of war did not bring liberation, the dominant WW2 paradigm in ‘old Europe’.
For millions of European citizens, who
became EU citizens just a year ago, 1945 and Yalta saw their nations swallowed by the Soviet Union.
Some of those ghosts will be at the table of an EU- Russia summit in the Kremlin - a meeting that takes place just one day after many world and European leaders gathered in Moscow to mark the end of WW2.
The 60th war anniversary overshadowed events to commemorate May 9 1950, the day when French foreign minister Robert Schuman urged Europe to work together nations on coal and steel production – the first step towards the modern EU.
Alfonso Andria | Italy, ALDE
Changes over the last 60 years have profoundly affected Europe's political scene, and even its identity. The fall of the Berlin Wall and the bringing together of Europe's "two lungs", as Pope Jean-Paul II famously put it in a 1988 speech to the European Parliament, symbolised the start of a new era.
An era characterised by the end of totalitarianism; an era that gave Europeans the chance to live the dream of the EU founders: the dream of a Europe based on freedom, democracy and diversity.
Enlargement and, now, the European constitution, reward the obstinate tenacity of all those who, with clear foresightedness, believe that a united Europe is necessary for stability.
Our inheritance gives us a sense of responsibility and, at the same time, motivates us to carry on in the same direction. As Romano Prodi put it: “Lets get away from the accountancy approach.”
Lets lift our eyes from our ledgers and look at the far horizon - a grand political vision, an ever-growing area of prosperity, tolerance, democracy and freedom.
Jens-Peter Bonde | Denmark, IND/DEM
The lesson of the Second World War is very simple: avoid wars. It is called the last world war, but we have had more than 100 wars after the so-called 'last' war.
The European constitution includes a legal base for European participation in further wars without approval of the United Nations Security Council.
To my knowledge it is the only constitution in the world calling permanently for further military spending.
The constitution demands unanimity for military activities but allows also a certain number of member states to operate on behalf of the EU.
In structured cooperation some member states can be delegated to take part in conflicts which develop into wars.
European participation in a war can then only be stopped by a unanimous decision of EU leaders.
This is an absurdity - but a part of the proposed rules. The European Parliament has no say against the participation in a possible war.
Even if every single MEP should be opposed to a war it cannot be stopped by a decision in the European Parliament.
A war can declare itself and demand our participation, and we cannot stop it unless every single minister approves the decision.
Neutral countries, countries with a military derogation and countries who decide not to take part in military activities cannot be bound to send their soldiers.
But the EU fights for all. In practise, every country may be held responsible.
Who would have known if Iowa decided not to send soldiers for Vietnam or Belarus decided not to participate in the Soviet war in Afghanistan?
It may be dangerous to develop the EU into a military superpower. It is wiser to ask for a better constitution. Europe deserves better.
Mihael Brejc | Slovenia, EPP/ED
Some of the historical steps the EU has made in the last 60 years are its enlargements, the establishment of the monetary union (consequently the euro) and the constitutional treaty.
On the one hand, we salute and support these processes, but on the other hand we wonder, are the limits to EU enlargement?
Is it the geographical borders of Europe?
Is it the strategic geopolitical dimensions?
Does enlargement spread European values across Europe's geographical borders or are other values gaining strength in typically European environments?
If it is the latter, is this good or bad?
Is the demographic picture of Europe optimistic enough for bolder political moves in this regard or do we already have to make political concessions?
Will the future EU be a federation or continue to exist as a Community?
Where are the limits to the enlargement of a system, after which it could implode?
These are only a few questions, which require an answer.
Personally, I believe that EU enlargement has its existential limits and will not be able to continue unrestricted.
This is also why we need new ideas, a new vision of the future.
The EU as a system cannot survive constant enlargement, however it could, as a progressive community of citizens, nations and states, offer other regions the experience and idea of a different community or status.
There has not been enough discussion on these issues, which is also the reason why we do not yet have sufficient answers to the questions raised.
Maria Carlshamre | Sweden, ALDE
There is one individual European above all else we should thank for the liberation of Europe 60 years ago. I am not referring to any political leader, nor to anyone in battle field command.
His name is Alan Turing. And the true scope of his contribution is still in the making. Still to this day he is not as widely known as he should be.”
But without Alan Turing the war could have ended in defeat for the Allies.
His contribution was all a matter of intelligence: in both senses of the word.
He was an outstanding logician and founder of computer science.
But he was also one of the most eminent people working at the wartime cryptanalytic headquarters at Bletchley Park in Britain.
The military supremacy of the Germans lay for many years in the Enigma cipher, considered an unbreakable system of cryptography.
But Alan Turing managed the impossible - he broke the Enigma cipher.
On D-day the Allies had immediate knowledge of all German troop movements in the advance to Berlin.
Behind the Pattons and the Montgomeries on the battle field loomed the master mind of Alan Turing.
One would expect this to have made Turing into one of the major war heroes. This was not the case. And the reason is simple. Alan Turing was homosexual.
On March 31 1952, Alan Turing was arrested when the police learned of his relationship with a young man.
He made no serious denial or defence, instead telling everyone that he saw no wrong with his actions.
Rather than go to prison he accepted injections of oestrogen intended to neutralise his libido. The injections broke his health.
On June 8 1954, he was found dead of cyanide poisoning, a half-eaten apple beside his bed. He was 42 years old. The coroner's verdict was suicide.
Richard Corbett | UK, PES
The liberation of Europe that ended the Second World War also heralded a fundamental change in the European political landscape.
Sixty years later, for the first time in the history of the world, a continent that was perpetually ravaged by war has become a beacon of peace, solidarity and democracy.
In today’s Europe, the legacy of the soldiers who gave their lives to defeat fascism is still tangible.
We see it not only in the moving 60th anniversary tributes watched by the world this week, but in the very existence of our day-to-day cooperative framework to which 25 countries have now subscribed.
When you put the history of our continent in perspective, it really beggars belief that there are still people in my country who think that the best thing for Europe would be for us to rip apart everything we’ve been building for the past 60 years, close our eyes tight shut, and pretend that an isolationist Britain can somehow become ‘independent’ again – in other words, to try and resurrect a 19th century worldview in a 21st century reality.
To my mind, there’s no more appropriate way for us to honour the great sacrifices made for us than to continue working together to build a more peaceful, more constructive and more democratic Europe: a Europe that those who gave their lives for peace in two world wars would have been proud of.
Panayiotis Demetriou | Cyprus, EPP/ED
The EU's enlargement will be without significant historic meaning if not coupled by deepening of the union.
This deepening can be undoubtedly achieved by the European constitution, under ratification.
This constitution is not the best the academics could draft nor the best each state or each European citizen wanted.
However, it is the best possible compromise arrived at by states representing almost half a billion of citizens.
The European constitution is a big step towards European integration.
That is why the ratification of the constitution by all the member states constitutes a decisive stage for the achievement of the European vision.
The establishment of a strong, effective, respectable, peaceful and prosperous union is the dream of every European.
The method of treaties is being proved day by day inadequate and inappropriate to regulate properly the functioning of the enlarged EU.
Enlargement is not by itself a European objective. The question is not to create another superpower on the globe.
The challenge is to establish an alliance of states, nations and citizens operating as a central beacon of values and humanism illuminating the world.
The European constitution can meet this challenge under the present continental and universal conditions.
‘Yes’ to the European constitution means ‘yes’ to the future of Europe.
Ana Gomes | Portugal, PES
Sixty years after Europeans butchered other Europeans in the Holocaust, the world is watching Europe more than ever. Much is expected from her. This is the result of Europe’s success.
In almost 50 years of integration and expansion, Europe has brought together former foes, old and young democracies, highly developed countries and others keen to catch up.
All are bound together by the pillars of European identity: peace, tolerance, human rights and the rule of law, sustainable development and social justice.
Looking forward to the year 2030, one can imagine a further enlarged EU.
The Western Balkans, Ukraine, Turkey and others in our neighbourhood look at Europe as a source of inspiration.
A rigorous evaluation of the Copenhagen criteria will assist our fellow Europeans in progressing, as other once young and fragile democracies - like my own country, Portugal – also dreamed of and achieved.
The European constitution embodies the most fundamental values we hold dear.
Beyond and above the challenges posed by ratification, the constitution enables Europe to look into the future and think and act strategically.
The creation of a European External Action Service, backing the intervention of an EU Foreign Minister and a coherent Common Foreign and Security Policy, cannot wait: the world expects clear purpose, consistency and efficiency from Europe in global governance.
Europe isn’t short of ambitious goals. We have been learning our lessons from the past. It is up to us all, European citizens, to continue building Europe, making sound choices of leadership and policies.
To make this new century different from the one we left behind and better for all mankind.
Lissy Gröner | Germany, PES
My work as a social democratic parliamentarian is a contribution to overcoming the terrible destruction caused by Nazi Germany in the Second World War.
The EU, built on peace, democracy and solidarity, is the best way to overcome the terror of war.
Through cooperation and respect for diversity we have built a new Europe where, regardless of origin, women and men, young and old have the right and space to develop a life in dignity and security.
The European constitution will be a solid foundation for future cooperation between Europe’s member states.
Equally important, it represents a guarantee for all citizens that never again will there be war in Europe.
Roger Helmer | UK, EPP/ED
We started the European project with the highest motives: to prevent war and ensure security.
In 1975, the British people voted on narrow economic issues to remain members: they believed that they were voting for free trade, jobs and cooperation.
We now find that we have created a monster. The massive weight of over-regulation is destroying competitiveness and productivity in Europe. Unemployment in core countries has reached levels not seen for 60 years.
The euro has failed to deliver tangible economic benefits, and is in large part responsible for economic stagnation. The Lisbon process has descended from failure to farce, while investment goes elsewhere.
The European demographic debacle hangs over us like a storm-cloud.
The EU is undermining democracy in Europe. Powers are transferred from democratic institutions in member states to remote, unaccountable, anti-democratic institutions in Brussels.
Voters know that their votes in EU elections have no effect, so increasingly they stay home, and participation rates fall.
And the EU commitment to separate defence structures outside NATO is undermining the Trans-Atlantic alliance, and threatening our security.
The future is bleak. We must vote against the EU constitution, and start again to build a Europe based on free trade and voluntary intergovernmental cooperation.
Erna Hennicot-Schoepges | Luxembourg, EPP/ED
It was 60 years ago that my country, the Grand-Duchy of Luxembourg, was freed from a terrible nightmare. The Nazi invasion set out to destroy our identity, our language, our independence.
The sufferings endured in the concentration camps, the forced evacuations, forced enlistments into the Wehrmacht have become part of our history and are often forgotten when counting the victims of the Second World War.
Our country is proud to be a founding member of the EU. Solidarity among the European peoples, freedom of expression and respect for human rights, are what guarantees our survival in a globalised world.
As an independent country and member of a strong EU, the memory of the sufferings will not allow us to forget the American soldiers who died on our soil during the atrocious Battle of the Bulge.
Today, the veterans and their offspring have become our friends. Never again shall we wage war for the sake of resolving conflicts.
Mieczyslaw Janowski | Poland, UEN
The last century has been marked not only by numerous examples of human creativity but also by two world wars. They caused enormous losses - deaths, injures, sufferings, material and moral destruction.
This was the 20th century when we experienced totalitarian systems: Nazism - personified by Hitler, and communism - identified with Stalin.
It is hardly possible to imagine a total number of 160 million victims of these two dreadful ideologies. We should remember this.
Not to scratch old wounds but to make sure that such crimes could never happen again.
It must be constantly recalled as we can observe attempts of denying historical truth.
In its light, we should also not forget about great sacrifice of nations being part of then USSR.
The end of the Second World War could have created new perspectives for the world, including Europe. Unfortunately, the Yalta agreements came to fruit with the ‘iron curtain’.
The year 1989 brought the "autumn of nations", preceded by emergence of the Solidarity movement in Poland in 1980. In this context, the person of late Pope John Paul II, bringing hope for oppressed nations, must be recalled. We also have to remember a positive role of Russian "perestroika".
These were great historical and peaceful liberating transformations. The Berlin Wall collapsed. The majority of countries, which then regained their freedom, today belong to the EU, including German Democratic Republic.
I wish to express my deep appreciation to the "fathers of Europe", who had a great vision and succeeded in putting it in practice, breaking political, economical and mental barriers.
As a result, those who used to shoot to each other could stand hand in hand and build their common home.
Europe requires joint care. If we look closer at the reality of globalised world, we can observe that EU cannot be driven by anyone's short-term interest.
The union gives the opportunity for common success. It is important therefore not to lose this noble idea amongst everyday arguments, flood of bureaucracy or attempts to win one against the other.
It would contradict with the principle of solidarity and be harmful for everyone.
In conclusion, I wish to stress that it is the human being who must be a primary subject of all activities of public institutions in each of 25 EU member states and in the EU institutions (Parliament, Council and Commission).
To be accepted, understood and useful, their actions and their organisation must be adjusted to human needs.
Today, the sun shines for all of us. Let us not waste this chance. It could not be forgiven by our children and children of our children.
Gisela Kallenbach | Germany, Greens/EFA
We all have reasons for celebrating 60 years of peace in Europe. There are, of course, substantial problems that remain to be solved in South-East Europe – but we should not forget that this area belongs to Europe and we are responsible for a peaceful common future!
The recent escalation in tension between Chinese and Japanese reminded me how preferable our situation is in Europe.
It is unthinkable that former enemies like Germany and France or Poland will ever again have military conflicts.
The citizens of the EU will be good neighbours and are becoming better and closer friends, even if there are certain difficult issues of the past that are still under discussion and which need to be brought to a close – in a peaceful and mature manner.
This value of peace and compromise, cannot be highly enough esteemed.
I strongly support the ratification of the treaty establishing a constitution for Europe and call on all member states to strengthen European integration.
We need the strong basis of the Charter of Fundamental Rights – and we need to launch a joint strategy to bring this unique European message to our citizens.
If they really knew what they would gain as result of a solid and peaceful union, they could not vote against the motto: united in diversity.
I count on Commissioner Wallström to come up with encouraging proposals on how to communicate Europe. I am sure most MEPs will play their role – I certainly will.
Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann | Germany, GUE/NGL
When Soviet troops struggled in 1945, street by street, in the capital Berlin for the victory over Hitler’s Germany, the Reichstag, in the heart of the city, was one of the last disputed places.
Here the “career” of Hitler began and here the criminal war should find its end. On the April 30, head supreme commander Shukov could report to Moscow, that the Soviet flag was waving over the Reichstag and the centre of Berlin.
Later he wrote in his memoirs: “Many of the columns and walls of the Reichstag were inscribed closely by our soldiers. Out of these short sentences, the ordinary initials of the soldiers, the officers and the generals spoke their pride in the Soviet people, in the Soviet armed forces, in our homeland, in the party of Lenin. We also scratched our signatures in the walls.
On the question of these inscriptions of the soldiers there were continually vehement arguments in the Federal Republic. Often fears were voiced, that the victory inscriptions of the Soviet soldiers would be felt as a sign of disgrace and shame by citizens.
During renovation in the 70s most of the inscriptions were removed or “covered”. Only the British architect Norman Foster, who gave the old Reichstag a fantastic modernization, recovered them again and made of this evidence of history a part of the new building of the Bundestag.
Nevertheless some of the exceptionally rude and shocking sayings had to be removed. Nowadays we find the inscriptions are located on three places in the building of the Bundestag.
One of the inscriptions says: ‘Woina kaput’ (the war is ruined). It seems to be unlikely, that the liberation of Europe from the Hitler-fascism could have been expressed in a more impressing way.
Timothy Kirkhope | UK, EPP/ED
The EU’s keenest supporters often justify further integration by pointing out that Europe's nations have not fought each other for 60 years. Even if this were wholly true, I think it misses the point.
Peace is ours because Europe, in partnership with America, confronted and defeated the threat of Soviet communism. The EU is a symptom of that peace, more than a cause.
In marking the passage of 60 years since the end of the Second World War, we should not forget the wars fought since. Many of our new colleagues in the European Parliament come from countries where the Cold War was a dangerous, daily reality.
Ten years ago, the Bosnian war was still raging but now, Balkan countries aspire to EU membership. We have a duty to ensure their economies, and ours, reap the benefits of a prosperous and growing internal market.
It is true that the EU has helped to entrench a culture of peace, democracy and human rights throughout Europe. But the EU's drift towards closer integration has left millions of people in Europe feeling increasingly detached from it.
The constitution is not the answer. Far from making the EU operate more effectively, it would increase bureaucracy, further weaken accountability and undermine national sovereignty.
Europe is at a crossroads, as it was in 1945. The challenge then was to make peace permanent. The challenge now is to make prosperity permanent, for the EU and for those countries aspiring to join it.
The best way to achieve this goal is through decentralisation, deregulation and a more effective single market.
I am confident that if Europe shows itself capable of reform, it will rise successfully to the challenges of the new century.
Jan Kulakowski | Poland, ALDE
The end of the World War Two initiated two processes that have acted on the history of Europe and even upon the history of the World: a positive process, European integration, and a negative process, the division of Europe - a result of the Yalta conference.
Decisions in Yalta were made under pressure from Stalin, which influenced Roosevelt and Churchill.
As a result all countries of Central and Eastern Europe lost their sovereignty and became satellite countries of the Soviet Union.
Undoubtedly, the 60th anniversary of Yalta conference is a sad anniversary for Poles, since it delayed for almost 50 years the possibility of Poland's participation in European integration.
This political division was deepened even more by the economic division, which existed due to the fact that, in 1947, the satellite countries of the Soviet Union, following Moscow's "order" had to refuse the offer of the US to accept Marshall's plan - the core element of the economic integration of Europe.
European integration is a positive result of the Second World War. Marshall's Plan, the creation of the Council of Europe, and, notably, Schuman's Declaration of 1950 and the formation of the first European Community: European Coal and Steel Community were the beginning of the integration of the Western Europe, which, only now, became the integration of Europe and erased all decisions made in Yalta.
The basis for the Schuman's Declaration and the European integration was to aim at obtaining peace, reconciliation, cooperation and democracy in Europe.
These aims were fundamentally political.
I believe, that the enlargement of the EU, and, in particular, the membership of my country will bring back, in new circumstances, the strength of the political and even moral vision, which was the vision of the founding fathers of the European integration.
Aldis Kuškis | Latvia, EPP/ED
In terms of the common awareness of history we Europeans have of World War Two – who is interested, really?
Is it a matter of respect for numerous victims, or a binding tool for all over vision of a united and strong Europe?
We hear people still saying ‘the Old Europe’ and ‘the New Europe’, as if for decades there were ‘two Europes’ developing in different directions.
Today Europe is reunited as political and institutional body. But wait! Is it so reflected in the hearts of Europeans?
I believe that we cannot expect European nations not to have different perceptions about the history of Europe. It is our responsibility to put preconditions in place for next generations.
Through a common past is how we have earned this reality of free and democratic future.
Important steps have been already taken – namely the open letter signed in the European Parliament on November 18 2004, the pan-European Red Square May celebration public debate. Those are welcome, long expected signs.
‘All good medicines are bitter’, Latvian mothers lovingly say to their kids. Shall the unbiased history of Latvia and Baltic states, all of Europe, be such a good and bitter remedy! It is time to condemn all totalitarian rules of whatever ideological background.
It is time to condemn Soviet totalitarian communism: time to end the World War Two.
Zbigniew Kuzmiuk | Poland, EPP/ED
Sixty years after the end of the World War Two, when the emotions related to it are substantially tempered, it seems that this disaster might have been avoided, if the nations of the pre-war Europe had displayed more solidarity in the face of the German menace.
This solidarity was lacking before the war, like in Munich, but it was deficient also at the end of the War, in Yalta, where Soviet Russia and the Western allies divided Europe with the infamous iron curtain.
Today, when the wounds after the WW2 are healing, and Europe tries to recover after years of the Yalta order, we seem the most united ever.
It's been already one year since the historic enlargement of the EU in May 2004. The next two states, Bulgaria and Romania have just signed accession treaties. And I'm convinced that Europe will continue to change, as solidarity is needed also now.
Therefore the EU should be open to accept new states, ones like the Ukraine. I believe we should also support more the nations deprived of democracy, as unfortunately there are still such nations in Europe.
I hope that European solidarity will also be visible in the arrangements of the financial perspective 2007-2013.
I think that there are reasons to be optimistic. It's because there are values binding all the European nations: human rights, freedom of individuals, democracy. I deeply believe that these values will spread soon over our whole continent.
Katalin Levai | PES, Hungary
On the first anniversary of our membership of the EU, I have been asked in a number of cases: what does it truly mean, to be European, to pass the first jubilee.
Well, commonly it means, that I get on the plane as if I were to board a tram, and I cross borders not as an alien, but like an inhabitant, something that has never happened before in my youth.
But Europe also means to me, that a lady mayor of a Hungarian town is able to inaugurate a swimming pool that was subsidised by the EU, or that 70 young Roma can start their media studies in a university or the fact that recently a dressmaker's shop in a Hungarian city has been opened, employing 80 people.
And Europe is for me to see the first-year students of my city Budapest’s university travelling to Leuven by winning a scholarship, studying sociology or law in English.
I realise how they take possession of the European institutions, or the French, Dutch, Belgian and German cities with the utmost ease; how freely they move among the diversity of cultures, since nothing binds their hand or foot.
In a word, our founder fathers were geniuses. (It is unfortunate that there weren't women among them.) In this last year we have been learning more self-respect and tolerance as well.
The possibilities offered by the EU membership were exactly what we needed for this; to see the free movement of goods, people and information.
As of now, freedom belongs to us but not yet to everybody. It is in the hands of those, who are young, highly qualified, who speak languages, and have international relations.
This is thus the new European elite, who are taking advantage of the given opportunities; however it is still not the majority.
For the majority, Europe is still far away. They can not grasp it neither in schools, nor in their home or at work place. Europe shall belong to all of us whenever it reaches the villages, work places and the people.
Caroline Lucas | UK, Greens/EFA
The EU was built on the rubble of the Second World War, in an optimistic, but ultimately successful, attempt to promote peace and prosperity through a free trade project.
However, free trade has now become an end in itself. The EU, centralised and bureaucratic with a neo-liberal agenda at its heart, is incapable of effectively confronting the real problems of today, such as the threat to democracy from multinational business, or the global injustice that is leading to mass migrations of people, climate change, and the rise of violent fundamentalisms across the world.
Clearly a new "big idea" for Europe is required. For Greens, that idea means a bolder more ambitious vision of genuine stability and co-operation in which nations and regions reclaim control of their economies and communities.
A Green 'Europe' must be a sustainable Europe based on unity-in-diversity, achieved by popular consent, not centralised uniformity at the behest of corporate interests.
The Laeken summit promised to re-examine the ideals and values underpinning the EU and redefine which EU competences should more properly be returned to member states.
Unfortunately, the proposed constitutional treaty fails to return any areas of activity to national level – and manifestly fails to inject a new big idea into the European project.
That’s why the polls in France are predicting a rejection of the treaty in their referendum on May 29.
Saying ‘no’ is an essential first step to dragging the proposed treaty back to the drawing board and beginning anew the process of drafting a simple, clear constitution which reconnects Europeans to the EU by placing peace, sustainability, accountability and democracy at its heart.”
Claude Moraes | UK, PES
Sixty years after World War Two, parts of Europe are now unrecognisable, with many of our great cities and regions becoming truly multicultural.
This underlines that Europe's future should not be based primarily on race, religion and ethnic background, but European values of today: prosperity for all, tolerance, respect for diversity, human rights and the highest social standards.
Sixty years after World War Two, Europe's challenges are now global. How do we measure up to the challenge of global migration and integration of new migrants while the EU's population ages?
The challenge of the emerging Chinese and Indian economies will have an increasing effect on our economies.
The EU is moving from post colonialism to a profoundly changing relationship with the rest of the world.
Wojciech Roszkowski | Poland, UEN
The truth about the consequences of World War Two in Europe is important for all of us. Not only for the inhabitants of the East and Central European countries, not only for West Europeans, but also for the Russians.
Though the Soviet Union contributed to the tragedy that started in September 1939, Russians have a reason to celebrate their sacrifices in the struggle against Nazi Germany after 1941.
They also have the right to be proud of their role in the defeat of the Third Reich, but they do not have the right to distort history.
Ignoring enormous crimes of the Communist system within the Soviet Union means a danger of repeating them. Celebrating victory over Nazism without referring to the criminal record of the Soviet imperial expansion is no way to reconciliation with Russia’s neighbours.
Anders Samuelsen | Denmark, ALDE
The enlargement in 2004 was a defining moment for the European project. Prior to the accession of the ten new countries the EU was often perceived as a purely economic project, but the new member countries highlighted a political, a developmental and a democratic perspective.
Instead of being an exclusive club for the wealthy, the citizens of Europe were presented a different picture - a picture of the EU as a democratic pioneer.
By simply holding out the prospect of membership the EU had furthered democratic development in Eastern Europe, and development happened at a hitherto unseen pace. It is unconditionally the greatest success Europe has experienced since the Second World War.
And the success continues. New countries live through quiet revolutions in the hope of future membership, and they all raise a crucial question: Are there limits to the EU?
Personally, I see no reason to mark out borders beforehand. If more countries live up to the Copenhagen criteria and have the chance of joining the community, then the EU will set an even greater example of cooperation, democracy and prosperity.
As long as we continue to be "united in diversity" there is less reason to worry about the outer limits of Europe than celebrating the success of the EU as a democratic dynamo.
Kyriacos Triantaphyllides | Cyprus, GUE/NGL
What will be the future of the EU in 60 years time? In my opinion, the Europe of 2065 should be built around two core values: social equality and peace.
Unfortunately, although our forefathers have sometimes fought ardently for both, together or separately, our generation tends to bypass some crucial issues that might be fateful to the legacy of the future.
In that sense, the draft European constitution fails to present viable guarantees of continuing peace or social equality.
Indeed, the word "market" is mentioned 78 times whilst the word "competition" is mentioned another 27.
In contrast, the social aspect of the constitution amounts to seven pages out of a total of more than 200 (in the lighter version).
Similarly, the creation of a rapid intervention force or the demand for higher military capacities on behalf of the member states does not exactly constitute the blueprint for a hegemonic area of peace.
Thankfully, the failure of the EU to bring a viable solution to the recent conflict in Yugoslavia is still fresh in everyone's mind.
In conclusion, I would admit that since the end of the Second World War, the EU has taken important steps in securing an area of peace, freedom and stability.
However, I hope that recent neo-liberal inspirations will only be a blemish in its long future.
Helga Trüpel | Germany, Greens/EFA
When we look back to the history of Europe, where neighbour states had been fighting against each other for centuries, culminating in the Second World War, no one can doubt, that the EU is one of the most amazing and successful political and economic projects that has ever been developed.
It is a result of the shared experiences of the past and the will to make the idea of the European integration real.
Considering the EU as something unique and valuable one should not be scared of the future challenges that will arise.
Regarding EU enlargement one year ago, a step has been made, that brings not only more prosperity and security, but a strong commitment for solidarity and peace between the people of the member states.
Of course there are still difficulties and various problems which have to be solved and maybe it will take some time, but one should never lose the view on the whole project and what it gained so far.
This is also the view which should not exclude further enlargements in the future, especially for those states who share the same values and the will for democracy, even if they do not share the same religion.
But it is true that enlargement and integration should go hand in hand; therefore I am convinced that the constitution for Europe is an essential step in the construction of Europe, in order to meet the challenges of the enlarged Europe in a democratic, transparent and efficient way for all Europeans.
Inese Vaidere | Latvia, UEN
I would picture the future of Europe in rather bright colours regardless of increasing globalisation and uncertainties that it implies. Europe is a pearl of cultural diversity.
I wish we would use the momentum to continue cultural development in a close community of nation states and mutual respect.
I think we're living in a lucky time, when almost all the Europe is free and democratic, being able to decide on its future.
As for neighbouring countries I believe that "the Orange revolution" in Ukraine has finally brought to an end the post Soviet empire, hopefully allowing Russian, Byelorussian societies to come to a consensus for democratic development.
The events of Second World War had a different meaning, what brought a liberation and democracy to some countries 60 years ago was a painful start of horrors of occupation for others as for example Baltic states.
Indeed due to diversity of our experiences, I believe Europe is strong to promote our common values. However first we must learn to understand each other and to speak in one voice to be a team.
By my mind it's indeed the speed of fusion of values across the continent, where the true challenge of European integration lies.
We can't expect an overnight change, but the symbolic meaning of the day of enlargement, the days of ‘the Orange revolution’ in Ukraine, is in marking the turning point for bringing our values closer.
Nikolaos Vakalis | Greece, EPP/ED
The EU had a moral obligation to integrate the countries of the former Eastern bloc after the collapse of the dictatorships that were established there after the Second World War.
In addition, the enlargement undoubtedly is of mutual economic interest to both new and old countries of the union.
In the short term, new countries will profit from the substantial financial aid they receive, while in the long term, new and old countries will gain from the extension of the internal market and the economic growth that will ensue.
Europe is above all an area of peace, justice, and prosperity. We often hear that Europe has no soul. I disagree.
Europe, apart from an institutional system, is also a unique cultural ensemble with common values and history that cultivates linguistic, cultural, religious, esthetic and geographic pluralism.
Europe has a unique power of attracting and integrating neighbouring and partner countries. The European Union has proved that it is the most efficient tool of peaceful regime changes in modern history.
Our fundamental values of human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, rule of law and respect of human rights have already been incorporated in the Constitutional Treaty and are our priority.
It is exactly this unique and "attractive" power of Europe that we need to render operational. That is why we need the European constitution, together with a common strategy for using our political, economic and developmental tools.
Nowadays Europe is avant-garde in many fields, such as environmental standards, renewable sources of energy, and several research areas, and the whole world admires our social model.
But we lack the capacity of projecting our influence to the outside world. This is where the European constitution has a major role to play.
Sahra Wagenknecht and Tobias Pflüger | Germany, GUE/NGL
Sixty years ago the states and armies of the anti-Hitler coalition together with the national resistance movements and partisan units put an end to the Nazi regime.
The ‘Third Reich’ with its gruesome Nazi ideology, supported by millions of Germans, brought to humanity boundless suffering, and crimes without historic precedent: the industrially organized murder of the European Jews, the genocide of the Sinti and Roma, the liquidation of further people on grounds of race and sexual orientation, the annihilation of the political opposition to Nazi rule in Germany, of individuals not ready to accommodate to its inhumane rules of life, of persons being seen by the Nazis not worth living, the invasion of the countries of Europe, the mass murder of their populations.
Numerous institutions of the Nazi state took part in these crimes: industrial companies and banks, the military and the repression apparatus, judges and doctors, science and media. They all had their share of responsibility in war, terror and annihilation.
By the end of the "Third Reich", Europe and the world could breathe at last the air of liberation. No more wars, never again fascism, and a radical destruction of the power basis of fascism, this was the spirit and message of the time. These were the hopes of the people freed from the concentration camps.
Today, however, we face increasing tendencies to deny the Nazi crimes, or to make them look relative by drawing historic comparisons in order to equate acts that cannot be compared. Such attempts must strongly be rejected.
The EU has the noble duty to commit itself without any objections to the anti-fascist struggle. Regretfully this commitment so far has not been included in the treaties of the EU and does neither form part of the Constitutional Treaty.
On the eve of the 60th anniversary of the victory over Nazi Germany that ended the devastating war which Germany inflicted upon Europe and the world, we call for a different Constitutional Treaty.
A treaty that explicitly states a commitment that fascism and militarism must never stand another chance in Europe. This commitment would be a decisive, yet only a first step, to build another, a better Europe.
Joachim Wuermeling | Germany, EPP/ED
Paris, Rome, Maastricht, Amsterdam, Nice... what comes next? The roots of the European integration process date back to 1951, when the Treaty of Paris established the European Coal and Steel Community.
On the basis of the different treaties the EU then was able to manage various hurdles and achieve many of its prime objectives: freedom, security and justice are guaranteed between the member states as far as possible.
The internal market has been liberalised stimulating international trade as well as sound competition across national borders.
But new challenges lie ahead. As the century of globalisation proceeds, the international perspective becomes more and more important.
Environment, unemployment and the threat of terrorism are examples of crucial issues that are part of the global agenda in the coming years.
In order to be able to cope with these challenges it is highly essential to defend the European interest commonly on a global level.
The European constitution forms an important cornerstone and provides us with the necessary instruments to interact successfully with the major powers as the US, Russia, China and others.
Europe's goals in the coming 60 years will be completely different from the past decades. Each generation has to give Europe its own policy shape.
First published in the Parliament Magazine
Have your say...
Please enter your comments below.