(Re)considering sovereignty in the European integration process

Abstract

The World War II (WWII) as a great shock significantly weakened the European nation-state paradigm and gave the European elites a chance to achieve a 'paradigm shift' from 'the nation-state paradigm' to a 'federalist paradigm'. However, the nation-state's strong institutionalization did not allow a paradigm shift and the WWII actually created a 'paradigm duplication' in the European integration process. In this two-layered atmosphere, 'democracy' was conceptualized under the influence of 'federalist intellectual paradigm' but its implementation had to be achieved in the nation-state paradigm. Therefore, this anomaly has played a significant role in the recent stalemate the European integration process has faced. For example, the literature clearly shows the relationship between the sensitivity of European nations towards their national sovereignty and the rise of Euroscepticism in the European integration process. Moreover, the institutional and legitimate strength of the nation-state gives the nation-state paradigm a gravitational power, which gradually weakens the feasibility of the ideas originating from the federalist paradigm. As a result, this article argues that a more symbiotic institutionalization of democracy and sovereignty is necessary to make the European integration more attractive again.

Separatism and Regionalism in Modern Europe

“…The EU's MLG system was designed to achieve political stability in Europe. However, its institutionalization underestimated the institutional power of the nationstate (Kaplan, 2018). Particularly, by putting the territoriality of the nation-state at its center, the MLG approach assumes that a supra-national polity and a European identity loyal to this supranational-polity might be achieved if transborder activism leads to a shift in the distribution of political goods and services from national polities to a supranational polity.…”

Analysing instability as a future for an institutionalization process: the EU, Turkey and the issue of migration

“…In other words, it could be argued that the European integration will continue as a dynamic ongoing process in the future, and its structure is open to a continual change. From this point of view, it could also be argued that the European integration process might gain more heterogeneity in time as it does not have a gravitational power (neither strong institutions nor identity, see [105]) to deal with the mentioned intertwined exogenous and endogenous variables. Moreover, the nation state is still the main actor of the integration process and they might develop different epicentres as a response to any change in the exogenous and endogenous variables.…”

Britain’s post Brexit trade deals: Taking back control or a threat to sovereignty?

“…As Elliott (2020) underlines, the UK has become "a rule-taker" rather than a "rule maker". Kaplan (2018) argues that even if we accept the misconceived idea that the UK has regained sovereign power, it has inevitably traded sovereignty for prosperity, because the new agreement does not provide sufficient protection for the City of London or the car industry. Most estimations predict the long-term losses to output to be high.…”