For a European Federal Republic

Despite cultural differences, the 27 countries of the European Union share many aspects of historical development

Currently, the member states of the European Union have many  things in common such as parliaments and tribunals. Although there are plenty of cultural differences, each country shares with another a continental historical heritage. After two world wars, it seems like the member nations have not learned their lesson about the menace represented by nationalism. In this period of crisis, many people have arrived at the conclusion that the best way to resolve problems is to be autonomous. However, the member states have problems that are global and need global solutions.

For five years, the citizens of the European Union  have been electing representatives to vote for  Strasbourg. Parliamentary parties from the member states range from right to left wing. After India, the European Union is the territory with the most voters in an electoral process. Apart from having common institutions, the possibility of choosing representatives in the same elections gives legitimate speech and defends the EU as a nation.  In addition, each member country has a flag representing this supranational entity. However, the media does not discuss what is happening in all of the 27 member nations. If the objective of the EU is to build a kind of “United States of Europe”, it will  have to create a consciousness among inhabitants in the continent.

Member countries that share borders are not always aware of the political and social reality their neighbours are living to the extent of turning their backs on issues close to everyone. Cognitive dissonance is present , but  the media only focus on local or national problems. News from other member states affects “third people”. Consciousness is limited to as far as each nation extends. In my opinion, the EU project requires detailed coverage and is not limited to speaking only about the same territory.

If European states transferred some of their responsibilities, it would be easier to coordinate services from administrations. The aspiration of the EU is to be a one nation-state, not 27 republics and kingdoms. The first step to achieve federalism should be to have only one Head of the European Community and individual prime ministers might have the role of a governor as in each state in the USA. However,  European states would have more autonomy than American ones.

The inhabitants from the Old Continent could adapt to this new reality. For this reason, the question about having a referendum to choose between monarchy and republic is almost irrelevant. The objective is a European republic, and it is a priority. Throughout history, Europeans have had  unions of kingdoms and principalities which developed into  new nations, for example, Italy and Germany. Why can’t the same be done in the case of the EU?

Challenges, such as climate change, artificial intelligence and security, demand international cooperation. However, Euroscepticism has grown with very populist promises. It is easier to be indignant with everything when there are no guarantees of improvement in a short period of time, and offering solutions is a complex task. EU institutions have ignored their problems of communication without convincing the citizens of the advantages of this union. Nationalist parties have used this to say that Europe as a common project is a failure.  The illusion created by the Euro in 2002 seems to have disappeared in the public opinion. Many people have forgotten that this coin has made commerce easier among  member states.

These days, Brexit and the increasing support of anti-immigration movements are shaking the solidarity concept of the EU. The crisis shows how emotionally fragile the human being is. This is a bad moment, but in good periods optimism is higher and the idea of union is stronger.

What happens in one state, affects what happens in the whole EU

Member countries have to keep updated. The risk of the influence of separatist  movements affects all  27 members. Although in Catalonia secessionism is big, not only Spain has this territorial problem.

Currently Corsica is governed by a coalition of three nationalist parties; two of them are autonomists (Femu a Corsica and Partitu di a Nazione Corsa, with 18 and 10 seats, respectively), and one is separatist  (Corsica Libera, with 13 seats). These groups occupy 41 seats of the 63 in the Corsican assembly.

In 1996 Italy experienced a false declaration of independence of its northern part with the neologism of “Padania”, by the then president of Lega Nord, Umberto Bossi. “We, peoples of Padania solemnly proclaim: The Padania is a federal, independent and sovereign republic”, he intoned. Moreover, in 2014, before the Scottish referendum, another similar referendum was celebrated in Veneto, but it was not binding. Two million people participated making it 73% of the total electoral vote. Secessionists won with  89% of the vote. The same region also strove for greater autonomy with another  binding referendum in 2017 about its administrative status. In any event, the independence of a part of Italy is legally impossible. “One and indivisible”, as stated in Article 5 from the Constitution of the Republic.

Another peculiar case occurred in Germany at the beginning of 2017. The Constitutional Tribunal denied Bavaria the possibility of celebrating a self-determination referendum after a citizen from the Bundesland asked the German supreme judicial court  about the request of this plebiscite. The leader of the Bavarian Party, Florian Weber, defends that no court will decide independence other than the Bavarian people. This force, the most voted from separatism, obtained less than 2% in the last elections. However, Bavaria keeps distinctive cultural features with respect to the rest of Germany, due to its Catholic origins, different from the protestants from another Länder. More countries in the EU have separatist movements, some of them being the consequence of at least one of the two world wars.

It is not necessary to give  more examples to understand what happens in Spain in the case of Catalonia, as it happens in the European neighbourhood. As the growth of Eurosceptic parties increases, there are possibilities to believe in stronger secessionist movements in the near future. In fact, it is easy to see many polls on referendums for independence. Since Brexit, there has been an increase of these polls in the EU.  However, no one seems to ask about the transformation within a nation. It looks like the world trend is to erect borders.

Although some separatist  parties identify themselves as Europeanist, others support a strong Euroscepticism. And beyond these two tendencies, separatism is their priority. The debate about a new Europe is secondary. This question is especially interesting to secessionist movements that want an international echo of their cause. If they did not feel listened to by Brussels, Luxembourg or Strasbourg, the EU would be accomplices of repressors. Carles Puigdemont, ex-president of Catalonia, said that Europe was influenced by Franco because, according to him, the continent was following the standards of democracy from the Spanish dictator. Puigdemont said that after other politicians and himself, who had proclaimed illegally the Catalan Republic and escaped from the Spanish Justice, could not enter the European Parliament to process their temporary accreditation as Euro Deputies. It is not logical to be Europeanist only for personal benefits.

Although our history is very different from the American one, there are similarities. The Confederate Union was very similar to the EU: each territory had different political systems. In addition, they were at war with the Federal government. The United States  was deeply divided, but, as of today , it is difficult to imagine a high revindication of independence in any of its territory.

A reason of concern is the way these topics are addressed in the educational system.  In my own experience, I finished my school years without knowing much about the structure of the EU. In addition, in some parts of Spain, history is taught with indoctrination. In many Catalan and Basque schools, children learn that Catalonia and the Basque Country are nations invaded by Spain, respectively. In fact, this question is ignored by the majority of Spanish politicians, who during decades have turned a blind eye to this issue. We have other problems in the Iberian peninsula too. Events in Spanish history such  as the Second Spanish Republic, the Civil War and Franco’s dictatorship are not studied with enough depth to understand them.

In other countries such as Belgium, many people do not know the crimes of King Leopold II with the Congolese. In Austria, some inhabitants believe that the Spanish Empire was Austrian because of the Habsburg dynasty. There is a long “etcetera” of manipulations in Europe. How can these obstacles be overcome? If we support the EU as a nation, there will be more interest  in the “local” problems of each member state. There are barriers, and, maybe,  national pride confounded with special rights is the greatest one.

Narratives are so strong as they are difficult to change. Nations are legitimized  by their official storytelling of history, from their origins to present days. Apart from being an instrument of union and stability inside their borders, this kind of speech gives reasons to follow in the same way, with practically no significant renovations in the concept of the territory.

Reporters Without Borders has determined that Spaniards are more interested in local news and much less in international ones. This fact needs a deep reflection about how, in general, people want to be informed in the globalization era. The development of the European Parliament is far away from the public opinion in Spain and other member states.

When elections occur every five years, the media only covers the national candidates. For example, in Spain and France we think only of the candidates of Partido Socialista Obrero Español (PSOE) and Partido Popular (PP) or in Parti Socialiste (PS) and Les Républicains (LR), respectively. Spanish and French media are not focused on the campaigns of other political parties such as Socialists and Democrats (S&D) and European People’s Party (EPP) in other countries. We live isolated from information, making greater participation in each state more complex.

Moreover, we ignore the strategies of parliamentary groups in Strasbourg to convince voters in Europe. Communication between social democratic parties or conservatives and liberals is ignored. We do not ask ourselves about the bonds established by equivalent  parties in different nations of the EU. Fortunately, interest to know what happens in the neighbourhood is growing, partly because of common sociological phenomena in the voters. It is like the growth of popularity of radical leaders has produced a spark to worry about our European siblings, at least, a bit more.

The term “foreigner” is a big barrier to educate the areas of humanist and universal values. The EU nations share more aspects than countries as China or India inside their borders. Today, the ministers of each state represent  their citizens. We have to remember that sovereignty belongs to people, not to any national institution. Peace and prosperity should be approached in a way that will ensure our rights. We cannot say that stability and freedom aren’t at risk of disappearing  in the whole of the EU.

Having  common laws and regulations is a strength of the EU project. Educational projects such as Erasmus have created networks among  people from diverse origins. In other parts of the world the privilege to cross borders without restrictions does not exist. The EU is much more than a commercial trade that only deals with economic issues. It is true that Erasmus needs improvements, but it is a guarantee of cultural exchange to advance  a universal paradigm of education.

There is an abyss of economic criteria among  EU members which is due to educational factors together with low media coverage making it difficult to understand. There are many  differences depending on geographic location. North and South mean opposite views with regards to the concept of economy.

The other challenge is how to calibrate the multi-speed Europe. Different steps of integration require  each member to make the necessary  arrangements. The EU suffers many symptoms of unstructured pillars because of geopolitical and national interests. EU agreements should be more basic than just belonging to the Nordic Council or Visegrád Group.

The COVID-19 crisis has put in evidence the reaction of countries in the EU during the worst moments. The lack of solidarity between member states makes advancement towards achieving a federal Europe more difficult, although at the same time it highlights the urgent need for solidarity. We cannot expect to be able to deal with a new crisis arriving here. Moreover, criteria to fight against any kind of pandemic should have more common measures to stop it. COVID-19 has shown that EU members need each other to make more solid and efficient plans. Elements such as the European Health Insurance Card have made the coverage between states to guarantee  member  citizens easy access to hospital care without restrictions for reasons of identity. We are able to cooperate for one European health system, with some variations depending on the circumstances of the territories.

The new EU, as a new republic in the world, would have three capitals: Brussels, Strasbourg and Luxembourg (executive, legislative and judicial, respectively). Inevitably, the Euro will be imposed in all states, and Schengen will be blatant and innate. In the linguistic question, flexibility is the rule. Any official language from each member nation could be used in any European institution as today.

We have to think about Esperanto as official, respecting the freedom of speech for the rest of languages in the EU. About this question, Grin´s report, written by the Swiss economist François Grin, analyses three possible scenarios in Europe:

·         English is a unique language.

·         Multilingualism, with predominance of English, French and German.

·         Esperanto as an institutional language in the EU.

The report defends the third option, arguing that adoption of Esperanto would save the EU 25 billion euros a year (more than 54€ per citizen). There are arguments against the language, although such a move may be achieved in the long term. I am not defending this option ; I am only exposing it as a possible alternative.

There are other points of view that say Esperanto is unrealistic to apply in the near future. Despite the fact that the adoption of this language would suppose large savings for Europe, countries such as Romania and Bulgaria would have to spend large  amounts of money for their economy to invest in Esperanto. Fifty percent  of European citizens seem to speak English, being the lingua franca of the continent and of business. Moreover, it decreases costs, making it easier for people to have social relationships. These conclusions belong to the report “(Business) English: The Lingua Franca of the New EU Economic Environment”, made by the economists Adriana Vintean and Ovidiu Matiu from the University of Sibiu (Romania) in 2008. In any case, the question of language is important to highlight the establishment of a more fluid communication between institutions in the EU, independently of positions about this topic.

With this article, I express my support that the EU could transform itself into a republic in the short term. In my opinion, we urgently need a version of a  “United States of Europe”. We could be a “nation of nations”, with a federal system. Bureaucracy in the 27 member states is enormous. Less sovereignty for countries´ governments is not less sovereignty for people. Eurosceptic and nationalists movements are powerful because   EU structures are not strong enough to have a cultural and political influence. Problems need global solutions, and building a republic for the EU may contribute to a bigger cooperation with nations from other continents. Respecting other opinions, I claim a referendum in the whole EU about changing its statu quo to a new one, based on a nation-state, where any other country from the continent can enter to be part of this project.