GI5064 Essay Questions: EU's Impact on European Democracy

Desklib provides solved assignments and past papers to help students succeed.

GI5064 Essay Questions
1

Introduction:
The EU undermines democracy in Europe is a well-known case for the European people
because the European parliament has decided to cut the funds for the European Union.
Because the members of the EU support and allow the corruption in the country which create
tension in between the government of Hungary and Poland. So, it defines that the EU is
failing to attain democracy in Europe and even harm the lives of the person. The EU plans to
negotiate with the United Kingdom in terms of Brexit so that the EU does not accept any kind
of changes in their union before the leaving of the UK through the legal procedure. The
Neoliberalism also give impact on the EU because its start by the European government
which create the many arguments in the way of critics. So, it clarifies the EU is focused on a
controversial way and they're breaking down situation harm the progress in Europe.
2

Argument and evidence:
The European Commission is known as the executive body which plays a most essential role
in the EU and takes many decisions on behalf of the EU. So, the commission builds the legal
negotiation from the Brexit to withdrawal the United Kingdom from Europe so that the
culture of the UK and even the people properly leave the country. The Brexit negotiation
reveals some points that the EU fully involve in this case. The key institutes which include in
the negotiation such as European Council which based on the political directions of the
European Union (Cheneval, et. al., 2015). The president of the European Commission
decided that they do not negotiate with the EU laws but it is also clear that this commission is
fully involved with the EU in their main decisions.
The EU is the failure to maintain their democracy in Europe which is elaborated by the main
ways which are as follows:
The European Commission claims that EU citizens want justice in regards of the members
have not been challenged in the court of the EU and even people questioning on the
validation of the EU court.
The EU refuses to go on the national court for justice, it means the European Union have the
fear of reveal in the big court (Slapin, 2015).
The EU follows the double standard because it signed the Aarhus Convention which
predicaments their process just like the national authorities so they maintain the pressure on
the national government for the justice.
The EU also breaks international law through give impact on the environment of Europe
which is the main issue.
The EU system properly manages the external border management and its also build the
legislation for the protection of the external border. This provides the safeguard for the
freedom of the movement in the area of Schengen. This the area where the border is started
each people who cross the border properly monitored by the European Union. The
monitoring is quite efficient which cover both areas such as the external border of the EU and
External border of Schengen (Borzel, 2016). On the other hand, the EU does not prevent
cross-border crimes such as smuggling of the migrants and trafficking at a huge level which
3

also give an impact on the people of Europe. So, this is the negative point in the control of the
EU system on external border management.
The Franco-German association in the breaking down of the EU because they smash the fight
so that the European Union hold their top spot in the presidency. This powerhouse is a
helpful element for the EU presidency and provides the warning that "things are not well"
through the most influential voices in the Brussels so that the people understand their point
and secure the breaking down of European Union (Krotz and Schild, 2018). the former
adviser of Brussels gives support to the EU through revealing the truth that the president of
French locking alert that who is the next European Commissioner due to Jean-Claude Juncker
retires.
The difference between the customs union and single market is as follows:
Both the institutes facilities the free trade which is the confusing element for their differences
but there is peak comparison because the Customs union eliminates the quota and prices
properly. On the other hand, the Single market excluded the ‘non-price barriers' on the goods
with effective points like legislation on the packaging, safety of the goods and standard of the
food material. So, the partially both institute handling the same tasks but it is a big difference
in the tariff and non-tariff. The single market is better institute because it does not charge on
the movement of the services and goods which differ from the free trades area.
There are some reasons which leave the campaign with the Brexit Referendum in June 2016
which is mention below:
The economic warnings of the Brexit are backfired because the public of the UK claim that if
they vote for the EU, they will get poorer in the future and this is not worth paying.
The Farage make the definition that the immigration create the issues and this message is for
the lower-income voters (Vasilopoulou, 2016).
The labours fail to connect with the voters due to they think that the EU is badly misjudged
because labours are the supports of the European Union.
The operation of Europe is helpful to identify the undermining of the European Union and the
election of the European parliament plays an essential role through the approved illegal
campaign to plan for the mediate. So, it is concluded that the former chief strategist plan to
4

spent his time to recruit the European parties in the Brussels based group so that it is easy to
process the political consultancy for the campaign of the minded parties. These parties are
helpful to provide legal advice on huge matters (Dijkstra, et. al., 2019). The undermining of
the EU is operated by the European parliament but it also supports the Union as well which
builds the confusion that the EU needs the justice or the legal action could be taken against
the members of the European Union.
This is the main question that European integration becomes the project of neo-liberal
because most of the people think that the EU is organized as undemocratically so that there is
no control on their chance. On the other hand, some think that the emerging of the Neoliberal
in the past 1980s which based on the profits, money and severity which is proceeding without
any social fabrics (Tierney, 2015). So, most of the practitioners and scholars give critic on the
EU become part of the Neoliberal project which negatively influences the people and raises
the voice against the EU.
This is necessary to identify the reason that why EU is not actual foreign policy actor because
the EU failed to maintain its position in the international level in the past 10 years even it gets
the huge support by the European parliament and commission. The main reason to not
become an accurate foreign policy actor is lack of leadership and dysfunctional process of
arrangement. The bigger countries always priorities their national foreign policy but the EU
merging and offer opportunities for their counteractive actions. It means that the EU has not
clear about its priorities and its failure to attain the objectives of foreign policy actor.
The EU eliminates the dominion of members which is the essential question because it’s clear
some doubts that each 28 member of the EU states the founding treaties so that privileges and
obligations exist in the international organization. The representation of exchanging the
binding laws is based on the common legislation which handling by the members (Guella,
2018). The members state in the EU to adopt the policies of foreign and subsidiary the
founding of the EU in an effective way. So, it is concluded that the EU does not eliminate its
dominances on the states of members because they are the main body of the Union.
5

Conclusion:
It is concluded that the European Union is a good case to discuss in the argument way
because Europe faces the many issues created by the corrupted members of the EU. The
discussion of the EU undermines democracy is essentially measured by the point of various
authors and critics. Because this case is very controversial for the European country and its
give impact on the individual lives. The arguments are well elaborated but most of the time it
is not properly explained due to high flexibility in the opinions. The government of Europe
take decisions to cut the fund for the EU but on the other hand, the Union get the support by
the government as well. So, it is hard to understand the breaking down of the EU. The topic is
strong and there are lots of points which argue in this case but its also make complexity to
understand its negative and positive aspect at the same time.
6

References:
 Borzel, T.A., 2016. From EU governance of crisis to crisis of EU governance:
Regulatory failure, redistributive conflict and Eurosceptic publics. J. Common Mkt. Stud., 54,
p.8.
 Cheneval, F., Lavenex, S. and Schimmelfennig, F., 2015. Demoi-cracy in the
European Union: principles, institutions, policies. Journal of European Public Policy, 22(1),
pp.1-18.
 Dijkstra, H., Petrov, P. and Mahr, E., 2019. Learning to deploy civilian capabilities:
How the United Nations, Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe and
European Union have changed their crisis management institutions. Cooperation and
Conflict, p.0010836718823814.
 Guella, F., 2018. European ‘equalization’rules and the de facto differentiation in
Member States’ revenues as a barrier to EU citizens’ freedoms. In EU Citizens’ Economic
Rights in Action. Edward Elgar Publishing.
 Krotz, U. and Schild, J., 2018. Back to the future? Franco-German bilateralism in
Europe's post-Brexit union. Journal of European Public Policy, 25(8), pp.1174-1193.
 Slapin, J.B., 2015. How European Union membership can undermine the rule of law
in emerging democracies. West European Politics, 38(3), pp.627-648.
 Tierney, K., 2015. Resilience and the neoliberal project: Discourses, critiques,
practices—and Katrina. American Behavioral Scientist, 59(10), pp.1327-1342.
 Vasilopoulou, S., 2016. UK Euroscepticism and the Brexit referendum. The Political
Quarterly, 87(2), pp.219-227.
7