One reason for the lack of voter response is the EU's desperate need to explain itself to Europeans. Most Europeans perceive what is done in Brussels as quite remote from their daily lives. Although this perception is inaccurate - few people consider how EU directives, decisions, and regulations affect corporate or personal practices - the distance the current structure imposes from the Euro-crats and the MEPs and their constituents is a serious problem. If people do not understand what the European Parliament does, why should they take interest in who represents them in it?
Voter fatigue also explains the low turnout. Several member states recently held state elections whose issues more directly affected voters. In the European Parliament elections, these issues were ignored in deference to the broader issues affecting "Europe". Again if people do not understand their integral role in "Europe", the ideal of "Europe" will seem nothing more than a lavish academic exercise in organization building. The impression across much of Europe - this is especially true in the new member states - is that elections are held, governments are chosen, governments go corrupt, governments resign, and within a very short time more elections are held so the cycle can begin again. After the succession of scandals within the European Commission that began in 1999, the same corrupt image plagues the EU. Combine that with substantial confusion on what those unelected Commissioners do, and the low turnout at European Parliament elections should be no surprise.
The EU's "democracy deficit" and voter apathy at Europe-wide elections are not new problems. Part of these problems would be solved by the new European Constitution that would create a new balance of powers and interests among the member states and the EU. The new Constitution would prescribe an elected President of Europe and a representative for foreign and security issues. The trial model for the common foreign affairs and security policy is now less than effective, and it is not the appointed representative's fault. Javier Solana tries as diligently as anyone could to represent the "European" position on foreign and security policy. The problem lies not with Mr. Solana for his efforts, but it is impossible for him or anyone else to represent a "European" policy where no such policy exists. Since the divisions emerged within Europe as to the support for and the extent of the Iraq intervention, Mr. Solana was forced by necessity into silence on an issue where his expertise would be requisite and valuable. Instead Europe's foreign and security policy messenger had no message to deliver and found he was diverted to tireless efforts to minimize the endless squabbling that resulted from the lack of a single policy to support.
Go To Page: 1 2
