Search Results

This concluding chapter reviews the overall predicaments of the European dilemma as the EU faces the dual challenge of national-ethnic diversity and social crisis. It focuses on the issues of European moral-political identity and the future of a multinational-multi-ethnic democracy. It asks which moral-political values and institutional strategies may actually guide the future integration of one of the world’s most powerful economic and political blocs. The discussion reconnects with the overall issue of the dual crisis of the welfare state and the nation, contending that the dual crisis needs to be restated as also encompassing a crisis for the EU-European supra-nation. With the character of currently dominant EU policies and the emergent ‘post-national workfare regime’ of the Union in mind, the authors elaborate on the potential capacity of the European supra-nation to offer a viable and democratic alternative. They question today’s strong tendency to seek solutions to an apparent crisis of neo-liberal strategies in stringent immigration and asylum measures, and retrograde policies of ethno-cultural entrenchment. This serves to highlight the crucial question as to which moral-political ‘creed’ will actually prevail in the 21st century.

Chapter 5 examines the role of focal points as mechanisms of information provision by analyzing a series of legislative proposals as case studies. It draws on interviews with EU officials and the statistical analysis of individual final votes on the EP floor. This chapter illustrates how focal points shape EP policy-making processes and outcomes. While Chapter 3 demonstrates that the policy positions of expert legislators determine the positions of their nonexpert colleagues on the EP floor, Chapter 5 shows how this process takes place for invested nonexpert legislators. The legislative proposals analyzed concern EU takeover legislation, the statute and financing of EU-level political parties, proposals on fuel quality and motor vehicle emissions, liability for environmental damage, the liberalization of port services in the EU, and EU citizenship and the free movement of people.

This chapter presents a map describing the new spatial architecture of social protection in the European Union resulting from free movement and competition rules, and their effects on traditional welfare state boundaries. The destructuring consequences of the new boundary configuration are discussed, with specific reference to pensions systems and the issue of migration. The chapter concludes by highlighting the margins of manoeuvre for a possible “nesting” of nation-based forms of social protection in a wider EU space, capable of promoting adaptation and reform, while upholding at the same time the basic pre-conditions for maintaining adequate levels of social protection.

This chapter explicitly models reciprocal causal effects, providing a comprehensive and integrated account of EU citizenship attitudes on EU support. While preceding explanatory chapters are all based on single-equation models, here a system of equations is estimated in which instrumental variables are employed to sharpen the understanding of the potentially reciprocal causal effects between citizenship and support. The results show that: i) among the three dimensions of EU citizenship, they key driver is people’s sense of representation; ii) once the ‘endogenous’ links between identity, representation and scope are carefully controlled for, all four of the theoretical perspectives whose impacts have been tested throughout the book appear relevant, although the stronger influences are associated with instrumental rationality and the use of heuristics; iii) although some inter-correlation exists between citizenship and support, estimates controlling for such endogeneity show that support for the EU is dependent on people’s sense of EU citizenship.

This chapter looks at the profound influence of EU citizenship and the Internal Market on the legal regulation of the areas where EU Member States retain full competence, using Member State nationalities as a case-study. In the context of a constant rise in the importance of the EU, and unavoidable growth in economic interdependence in Europe, the array of fields of law which come to be subjected to the indirect influence of the Internal Market is only likely to grow, presenting the division of competences between the Member States and the Union in a somewhat different light compared with what can be read in the Treaties. In a way, as long as the importance of European integration is growing it becomes much less important whether the Union actually has competence in regulating a certain area, since the national regulation by the Member States will necessarily take the changing reality into account, adapting national law to the Internal Market.

This chapter analyzes EU citizenship in Israel. Israel's high income level and low emigration rate set it apart from Serbia and Mexico and make dual citizenship less obviously useful. EU–Israeli dual citizens rarely refer to themselves as dual citizens, but instead see themselves as “Israelis with a European passport.” The chapter then demonstrates that citizenship applicants are mainly driven by two motivations that were conditioned by Jewish history. The first is the wish to hold an insurance policy against the possibility of Israel being destroyed. The second is the desire for a status symbol that signifies their elitist position in Israel as European-origin Jews. Ironically, the grandchildren of Jews who had left Europe for Israel now look to German or Hungarian passports for security.

This concluding chapter provides a summary review of the main themes and empirical findings developed in the book. It shows that the processes affecting perceptions of EU citizenship and engagement appear to operate in a broadly similar fashion cross-nationally. Obviously, levels of citizenship and engagement vary across countries and contexts. Nonetheless, the empirical analysis shows that EU mass publics tend to think about the EU in remarkably similar ways. The sense of EU citizenship among mass publics may not yet have ‘caught up’ with the formal legal citizenship that all EU citizens enjoy. This said, there is a real, measurable emerging sense of European citizenship, which complements rather than contradicts feelings of national citizenship among mass publics in all member states, and which counterbalances a developing Euroscepticism in some EU countries. This structure appears relatively stable, even during the severe global economic crisis which affected European nations after 2007

This chapter presents an approach that posits that global inequality in citizenship value is the main factor that shapes the acquisition and use of dual citizenship. The world's citizenships are not equal. Some citizenships provide access to a secure and prosperous territory; guarantee extensive social and political rights; and come with a prestigious, high-mobility passport. On the other end of the spectrum, some citizenships are practically worthless in terms of economic access, social welfare, and political rights—and, moreover, mark their bearer as an automatic suspect when trying to cross international borders. The chapter then describes a model of the global citizenship hierarchy. Within this hierarchy, citizenship from Western or EU countries provides the highest level of rights, opportunities, and travel freedom. Once dual citizenship became available, millions of individuals from middle-tier nations in Latin America and Eastern Europe drew on their ancestry or ethnicity to obtain EU citizenship. For those individuals, compensatory citizenship is a deliberate strategy of upward mobility in the global hierarchy.

This chapter gives an analytic account of the legal development of EU citizenship from the 1970s onwards and its formal incorporation as a status, with attached ‘citizens’ rights’, in the Maastricht Treaty (TEU, 1992), and provides a selective critical review of the theoretical debates its codification provoked. The principal problem is to provide a coherent account of citizenship in which EU identity can co-exist alongside, rather than supplanting, national identity, and in which EU citizens can own their common political output while maintaining the conditions of pluralism and diversity. The book's approach to these debates in relation to those of other commentators including Bellamy and Castiglione, Habermas, Kostakopolou, Shaw, and Wiener is outlined. The chapter indicates we need to move the idea of citizenship away from both belonging and privilege and toward the political capacity to define and reformulate the capacity of lives lived, in a community of agents: citizenship is about political organisation rather than social organisation, about agency rather than identity or club goods. Given that, the important issues for the EU are whether its institutional arrangements support citizenship as political agency, and whether underlying social contexts can support the exercise of such a citizenship.

This chapter discusses the role of EU citizenship in redefining the scope of fundamental rights by aggregating new bundles of rights. It argues that EU citizenship takes form through case law as the fifth economic freedom, redefining EU citizens’ rights within the private sphere. The interplay between national and European private law with this unorthodox notion of citizenship extends beyond the creation of a novel form of supra/transnational state and legal rules. The chapter claims that EU citizenship coupled with cases on private law and regulation nurture a new dimension of civic aggregation and political engagement from the bottom up. It develops a decentralized mode of constructing civic networks and civic identity silently forging an EU identity by gathering and depicting values slowly forged by the intertwining legal systems of EU member states.

In this chapter we will reflect on how the ongoing process of European integration affects citizenship. There are at least two ways we can think about this. The first is to assess the effects that European Integration has upon citizenship at the state level. In some ways, we have thought about this as we analysed changes to migration, the welfare state, and political participation. A second way we can think about it is by reflecting on a burgeoning European, post-national citizenship. Formally, citizens of the individual EU member states are also citizens of the European Union. This chapter examines what form EU citizenship takes, and how this interacts with existing (and for the EU treaties, dominant) national citizenship. For classical conceptions of citizenship, this relationship is much more problematic than for postnational, cosmopolitan theories.

This chapter illustrates that each national of a Member State shall be a Citizen of the Union (Articles 9 TEU and 20(1) TFEU). Citizenship of a modern European State comes with a range of well-recognized rights and duties. All States have different detailed frameworks, but the idea of the individual citizen’s intimate connection with, and expected allegiance to, his or her State is missing at the EU level. Articles 9 TEU and 20(1) TFEU also provide that Union citizenship ‘shall be additional to and not replace national citizenship’. It is but a supplement; though on a more positive note, EU citizenship strengthens State citizenship with a set of entitlements and protection that extend beyond that which can be provided at the national level. The chapter aims to provide an understanding of the scope of protection granted by EU law, as well as its relationship with national law.

This introductory chapter provides an overview of the EU Citizenship Directive. The European Union Directive 2004/38 or the EU Citizenship Directive gives effect to the right which EU law provides to all EU citizens and their family members of any nationality to move, reside, and exercise economic activities if they so choose on the territory of any EU Member State. The right to move and reside anywhere in the EU is a right which is accorded to Union citizens by virtue of Articles 20(2)(a) and 21 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) and enshrined in Article 45 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. The right of free movement of persons in their capacities as workers, self-employed persons, or service providers straddles two of the four fundamental freedoms of the European Union—free movement of persons and services.

This chapter assesses the restrictions on the right of entry and the right of residence on grounds of public policy, public security, or public health. The secondary legislation adopted specifically to give precision to this exception was Directive 64/221, which continued to apply until it was repealed by Directive 2004/38. It set out the meaning of and limitations upon the right of Member States to exclude or expel EU citizens or their family members on grounds of public policy, public security, and public health. All EU citizens and their family members who move from their home Member State to another Member State are entitled to enter and reside unless the host Member State can establish that one of these three grounds applies. These exclusions are foremost among the ‘limitations’ referred to in Article 21 TFEU on citizenship of the Union.

This chapter addresses a different challenge facing the EU: how citizenship is and should be defined in a ‘community’ which is primarily a market and in which non-market ties (political, cultural, social, national) are relatively less articulated. It argues that, notwithstanding broad phrases in the Treaty, access to ‘EU citizenship’ is in practice conditioned upon performance of paid work (housewives need not apply). Nevertheless, it contends that progressive possibilities remain in a ‘notion of a citizen imagined not only as a man but also as a woman’.

Chapter 4 looks at communitarian solidarity, which is connected with the novel idea(l) of community in the EU, and which describes the rights that citizens derive by virtue of their social, quotidian interaction with citizens in the host state. Communitarian solidarity, it will be argued, lies at the core of the equal treatment of mobile workers in their host state, informs the right to transboundary healthcare for patients, strips Member States of the capacity to differentiate in welfare access on the basis of nationality or residence alone. It is a normatively shallow but procedurally strong idea of membership, and can be traced in the case law of the Court in areas of education, healthcare, and social assistance. Particular attention will be paid to the access to student grants, where the limit to communitarian solidarity, and the tensions that it produces, is most pronounced.

Chapter 3 turns to the analysis of case-law development. The overlapping nature of EU and domestic legal orders, coupled with the great material detail in the EU Treaty, leads to a state of legal uncertainty concerning the reach of EU law. Some private actors benefit from drawing on this supranational, alternative legal setting. The interpretation of the four freedoms and citizenship shows that legal uncertainty about the Treaty’s ever-broader scope is embedded in a path-dependent interpretation of rights. Principles established in one area are transferred to other areas, as most private actors perceive there to be benefits from such a transfer and legitimize their claims through established principles. Legal uncertainty and path dependence appear contradictory, but they are helpful concepts for understanding how the Court can further the stability and predictability of European law while giving new incentives for further integration.