Introduction to International Relations

The Czech Constitutional Court is considering what could be the last legal case against the European Union’s Lisbon Treaty—a treaty that seeks to make the EU “more democratic, more transparent and more efficient.”

The Czech Republic is the final member state of out of twenty-seven who has yet to sign the treaty. Czech opponents to ratification, including the 17 senators who brought about the legal case, believe that “the treaty would create a superstate, and as such infringes Czech sovereignty.” The Czech President, Vaclav Klaus, also opposes the treaty, and says “he will not [approve it] unless provided with solid guarantees about property rights in the Czech Republic.”

The Lisbon Treaty would create posts for a EU President and a High Representative of Foreign Affairs and “streamline” EU decision-making (approving more decisions by majority vote rather than a unanimous one). It was meant to go into effect in January of 2009, but some countries were slow to ratify the proposal due to its ramifications for state sovereignty. The treaty cannot become law until the Czech Republic ratifies it.

So, what do I think?

The EU is an interstate regime that has been looked upon by neoliberalists as an example of how states’ cooperation can increase power and economic strength. I think that while this treaty would impose upon state sovereignty, creating an interstate government with a EU president and representatives, I think it would also allow for the EU to become a stronger entity as a whole. I can see the reasoning behind its opposition, especially among those who might see it as a means of making the EU is much like the US in the future, but I think that the absolute gains garnered by member states outweigh concerns about sovereignty and property rights. The world is shifting into a more interdependent era where interstate regimes play an increasingly large role, and the Czech Republic must eventually accept this.

Questions to consider

Does the Lisbon Treaty (and its imminent approval) signal an increasingly interdependent world, where interstate relations are becoming the norm? How will having a EU president affect the credibility of the EU, and the sovereignty of its member states? Should a public figure from a more powerful EU member state, such as Tony Blair (as some UK ministers suggest) become president, or should the president come from a small state such as Belgium that uses the Euro and is part of the border-free Schengen Agreement? Will the president ultimately come from a more powerful state (signaling the importance of power despite interdependence), or can cooperation for the good of all overcome nationalistic pride in choosing an EU president?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8327190.stm