Is europe still worth fighting for? Allegiance, identity and integration paradigms revisited

Allegiance to ‘Europe’ is more problematic than, say, commitment to a nation-state, due to the nature of the European polity. The EU cannot claim to possess attributes that provoke strong (or at least significant) identification from its citizens. This is why the legal figure of European citizenship – especially when one focuses on the affiliative dimension of citizenship – presents a most interesting case in the study of the interactions between international and public law, between domestic and transnational identities, and between allegiance to nation and to community of nations. In this chapter I will explore, first, the ideals of the European project that received a tacit allegiance from Europeans at the foundational stages. Next, I will mention some of the problems that the project faces at the present. These problems have put in jeopardy the identity of ‘Europe’ (the EU today) and demand a more explicit allegiance from European citizens, at a moment when such allegiance is wavering. In the final section, I will suggest that a revival of the foundational ideals, revisited according to the new challenges, could give Europe a renewed identity, worth its citizens paying allegiance to. Original integration paradigms According to Joseph Weiler, the European Communities (which would evolve into the EU) were created with three goals in mind: social integration (reconciliation and peaceful coexistence); economic integration (reconstruction and widespread prosperity); and political integration (restraint of nationalism through supranational structures). These elements constituted the purpose or telos of integration, as can be seen in the Schuman Declaration. Prosperity, the moderation of nationalism and peace were, in Weiler’s view, objectives with more than a purely utilitarian intent. They were <italic>ideals</italic>: a set of values, which could captivate the imagination of Europeans, mobilise broadly based political forces and counteract the powerful pull of nationalism. Those ideals represented not just any values, but ‘higher’ ones: desiderata that were altruistic (not self-serving, but implying a sacrifice), ethical (virtuous) and communitarian (needing the cooperation of all).