What is the EUROPEAN COUNCIL? | #EUDemocracyExplained
Summary
TLDRDans cet épisode de 'EU Democracy Explained', on explore le rôle unique du Conseil européen, où les chefs d'État ou de gouvernement des 27 États membres se réunissent pour discuter de sujets cruciaux, réagir aux crises, et fixer l'agenda politique de l'Union européenne. On y apprend que, bien que l'UE soit souvent perçue comme bureaucratique, ce sont les dirigeants nationaux qui jouent un rôle clé dans la prise de décisions. L'épisode explique aussi le fonctionnement par consensus et la publication des conclusions du Conseil européen, notamment à travers des exemples historiques marquants.
Takeaways
- 📜 Le Conseil européen joue un rôle crucial en fixant l'agenda politique global de l'Union européenne.
- 🤝 Les dirigeants nationaux des 27 États membres sont les principaux acteurs dans le processus décisionnel du Conseil européen.
- 🌍 Le Conseil européen réagit aux crises et prend des décisions importantes en matière de relations extérieures et de sécurité.
- ✍️ Les sommets informels des années 60 ont conduit à la création officielle du Conseil européen en 1974.
- 👩💼 Le Président du Conseil européen est élu pour un mandat de 2,5 ans et assure la continuité du travail entre les réunions.
- 📑 Le Conseil européen produit des 'conclusions' à la fin de chaque réunion pour définir ses décisions et priorités.
- 🚀 Tous les cinq ans, le Conseil européen adopte un 'Agenda stratégique' qui oriente l'action de l'UE pour le mandat législatif suivant.
- 👥 Les décisions du Conseil européen sont généralement prises par consensus, mais peuvent aussi être votées si nécessaire.
- 📅 Les réunions du Conseil européen se tiennent au moins quatre fois par an et attirent l'attention des médias.
- ⚖️ Les chefs d'État ou de gouvernement jouent un rôle clé dans la ratification des traités européens et le processus d'intégration européenne.
Q & A
Qu'est-ce que le 'Triangle Institutionnel' de l'UE?
-Le 'Triangle Institutionnel' de l'UE fait référence à la coopération entre la Commission européenne, le Conseil de l'Union européenne et le Parlement européen pour créer des lois.
Pourquoi l'Union européenne est-elle considérée comme un système unique?
-L'UE est un système unique car elle comprend 27 États membres avec des perspectives nationales différentes, fonctionnant selon le principe de double légitimité.
Quel est le rôle principal du Conseil européen?
-Le Conseil européen détermine la direction politique générale et les priorités de l'UE, identifie les enjeux clés et confie des tâches aux autres institutions.
Comment le Conseil européen a-t-il été créé?
-Le Conseil européen s'est formalisé en 1974 après des sommets informels des chefs d'État ou de gouvernement face à des crises mondiales, comme la guerre froide et des chocs énergétiques.
Quels sont certains des moments clés du Conseil européen dans l'histoire de l'intégration européenne?
-Parmi les moments clés : la décision de 1985 qui a conduit à l'Acte unique européen, les critères d'adhésion de 1993 à Copenhague, et la création de l'euro en 1998.
Qui sont les membres du Conseil européen?
-Le Conseil européen est composé des chefs d'État ou de gouvernement des 27 États membres, du président du Conseil européen et du président de la Commission européenne.
Quel est le rôle du président du Conseil européen?
-Le président du Conseil européen, élu pour un mandat de 2,5 ans renouvelable, préside les réunions, veille à la continuité des travaux entre les sommets et assure la visibilité du Conseil.
Comment les décisions sont-elles prises au Conseil européen?
-Les décisions sont généralement prises par consensus, c'est-à-dire qu'elles sont adoptées à condition qu'aucun membre ne s'y oppose. Si un vote est nécessaire, des règles de majorité qualifiée ou d'unanimité s'appliquent.
Qu'est-ce que le 'Programme stratégique' du Conseil européen?
-Le 'Programme stratégique' est un document adopté tous les cinq ans, qui définit les grandes orientations de l'UE pour le mandat législatif suivant.
Quelle est la critique principale du processus de décision par consensus?
-Le processus par consensus peut mener à l'impasse ou à des décisions édulcorées lorsque des membres s'opposent fortement à certaines mesures, ce qui complique la prise de décision efficace.
Outlines
📜 Introduction à la Triade Institutionnelle
Dans cet épisode, nous revenons sur les trois épisodes précédents concernant le rôle de la Commission européenne, le Conseil de l'Union européenne et le Parlement européen dans la création de législation. Nous évoquons également des concepts clés tels que la représentation et la légitimité double de l'UE à travers ses 27 États membres. L'épisode introduit ensuite le Conseil européen, où les dirigeants nationaux se rencontrent pour définir les grandes orientations de l'UE.
👑 L'Origine et l'Importance du Conseil Européen
Le Conseil européen, né de sommets informels dans les années 1960 et officialisé en 1974, est un acteur central de l'intégration européenne. C'est un forum où les chefs d'État ou de gouvernement se rencontrent pour discuter de questions urgentes, réagir aux crises, et établir l'agenda européen. Cet épisode explore l'histoire de cette institution et souligne son rôle déterminant dans des décisions majeures telles que la création de l'euro et l'élargissement de l'UE.
🧑🤝🧑 Les Membres et Fonctionnement du Conseil Européen
Les 27 chefs d'État ou de gouvernement de l'UE se réunissent au Conseil européen pour définir l'agenda politique de l'Union. Le Président du Conseil européen, élu pour un mandat renouvelable de 2,5 ans, joue un rôle clé dans la préparation des réunions et le suivi des décisions. Le Président de la Commission européenne, ainsi que des représentants comme le Haut Représentant, participent également aux discussions, reflétant l'importance de la coopération entre les institutions de l'UE.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Triangle institutionnel
💡Conseil européen
💡Légitimité double
💡Traité de Lisbonne
💡Agenda stratégique
💡Consensus
💡Président du Conseil européen
💡Sommet informel
💡COREPER II
💡Unanimité
Highlights
The European Commission, Council of the European Union, and European Parliament work together in the 'Institutional Triangle' to produce legislation.
The EU operates on the principle of dual legitimacy, involving 27 different national perspectives.
National politicians play a key role in steering the EU’s overall direction through the European Council.
The European Council, where Heads of State or Government meet, sets the EU agenda, reacts to crises, and nominates key officials.
All major EU treaties were negotiated and ratified by national leaders and parliaments, highlighting the importance of the national level in European integration.
The European Council formalized its meetings in 1974, evolving from informal summits held to address global financial instability and geopolitical crises.
The European Council initiated key decisions such as the Single European Act (1985) and the creation of the Euro (1998).
The European Council nominates or appoints candidates for top positions such as the President of the European Commission and High Representative for Foreign Affairs.
Decisions in the European Council are typically made by consensus, creating a cooperative environment for discussions.
The European Council conclusions are the primary tool for communicating decisions, and every five years, it publishes the Strategic Agenda, outlining goals for the next legislative term.
The June 2024 European Council conclusions include key decisions on geopolitical issues, EU internal reforms, and appointments to top jobs.
Consensus-driven decision-making is both a strength and a potential weakness, as it can lead to gridlock or diluted decisions when unanimity is required.
The European Council President, elected for a 2.5-year term, plays a crucial role in ensuring continuity and preparing future meetings.
The European Council conclusions reflect the collective decision-making of the EU's national leaders, showing that little can happen without their approval.
The 2024-2029 Strategic Agenda emphasizes the importance of the EU working 'together' to achieve common goals.
Transcripts
Welcome back to EU Democracy Explained! In the last three episodes, we have learned about how
the European Commission, Council of the European Union, and European Parliament
work in the ‘Institutional Triangle’ to produce legislation. We also touched on key concepts like
representation, accountability, and some of the different theories of European integration. In
doing so, we discovered that the EU is a unique system including 27 different
national perspectives working according to a principle of dual legitimacy. In this episode,
we’ll delve deeper, looking at how national politicians, in addition to their role in the
legislative process via the Council, can help steer the overall direction of the
Union. To do this, we need to focus on an EU institution that is not actually a part
of the legislative process. This is the place where the Heads of State or Government meet to
discuss pressing issues, react to crises, and set the European agenda: the European Council.
First things first: over the last seventy years or so, all the treaties that have
developed the European project into what it is today have been negotiated, agreed,
and signed by national leaders, and have been ratified by national parliaments.
Academics still argue over different theories of why and how European integration happens,
and each has its merit. But at the end of the day, nothing much would happen without the consent of
the national level. This is the first thing you need to understand about the European Council’s
place in the modern EU: the role of national leaders has been, and continues to be, crucial. So
next time you hear Eurosceptics complaining about ‘Brussels bureaucrats’ imposing their laws on us,
bear in mind the extent to which major decisions over the years have remained in the hands of
national leaders. Throughout the 1960s, informal summits developed at a time in which the world
was in turmoil: there was global financial instability, the Cold War was at its peak,
and energy shocks were a significant destabilising force. It quickly became clear that the leaders
needed to meet regularly and discuss these issues of common concern. At one such summit,
in Paris in 1974, they decided to formalise their meetings and meet more regularly. This means the
European Council is unique among all the other EU institutions: it created itself and did so out of
necessity. And, over the years, the European Council (or EUCO for short) made key decisions
in the history of European integration. It was the Milan European Council of 1985 that initiated an
Intergovernmental Conference eventually leading to the Single European Act; in 1993 in Copenhagen the
European Council decided on a set of criteria that would need to be fulfilled by any country
wishing to become a member of the Union; and the Special European Council in Brussels in 1998 was a
key moment in the creation of the Euro. There are many more examples in the history of the European
project. So let’s meet the key players: who are the members of the EUCO? The European Council is
one of the most ‘visible’ EU institutions on the basis largely of who its members are, and of what
they discuss during its meetings. Those meetings, which take place at least four times per year,
always draw headlines in the European and national press. You’ve probably seen your President,
Prime Minister, or Chancellor travel to Brussels or some other European city for either a regular
or special summit of the European Council. So, what is it about the EUCO that requires
the presence of national leaders? Its main role is to determine the overall political direction
and priorities of the EU: it identifies issues of concern, outlines what actions should be
taken to address them by giving tasks to the other institutions, and defines certain goals along the
way. In other words, it sets the EU’s agenda. But that’s not all: the EUCO also nominates or
appoints candidates for the ‘top jobs’ such as the President of the Commission (a nomination
that requires approval from the European Parliament) or the High Representative of the
Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (an appointment made in agreement with the Commission
President). There are other key aspects, like the so-called Strategic Agenda, that we’ll return to
later. And finally, the EUCO ‘steps up’ to react to crises, and to make the difficult decisions in
areas that are too sensitive to be addressed elsewhere in the system. It’s about the need
to take responsibility at the highest level. As an example, consider matters of external
relations that have a complex geopolitical or strategic implication. At a national level,
these are the decisions that have to be taken by the highest levels of government. Well,
in the EU you have 27 Members, so, naturally, with an issue of common concern, the 27 leaders
need to come together and take these decisions as a group. The same can be said of crisis response:
just like at the national level where it would be incumbent on the Prime Minister, President (and so
on) to react, at the EU level, it’s down to all 27 together! Ultimately, the EUCO is the forum
for European leaders to discuss difficult topics, set the agenda, and react to crises. In a sense,
it is the manifestation of the control each of the 27 national governments have over the
common agenda: if you think about it, not much can happen in the EU system if the leaders in
the EUCO don’t want it to happen. But it’s not only the 27 Heads of State or Government who
take part. There are two more members we’ve yet to meet, and a number of other figures who can make
their voices heard. The current iteration of the European project operates according to what is set
out in the Lisbon Treaty. It came into effect in 2009 and made a number of changes, including to
the European Council. One of those changes was to create the position of European Council President,
elected by the Heads of State or Government to a once-renewable 2.5 year term. Prior to this,
the presidency rotated between the Member States, as it still does in the Council. The introduction
of a permanent office of President means that the meeting Chair stays ‘in the system’, ensuring that
conclusions are followed-up on, and giving the EUCO visibility in-between meetings. As part
of this, they also meet regularly with each of the leaders to consult closely with them and make sure
the institution’s work is continued in the months between each meeting. The President also prepares
the next EUCO meeting, a process we’ll come back to later. Since the Single European Act of 1986,
the President of the Commission is formally also a member of the EUCO, after having participated as a
non-member in the early years. This means that when the agenda is being set, the institution
that holds the right of legislative initiative is present in the room and can advise on how best to
go about implementing the leaders’ vision. In this capacity, successive Commission Presidents have,
for instance, advised the leaders on what legislative solutions may be feasible given
the competencies granted to the EU by the treaty, and conversely on what might require a different
solution. Non-members can also make their voices heard. Before each meeting, the President of
the European Parliament is invited to outline that institution’s view on the topic(s) under
discussion. The High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy takes
part in the EUCO’s work despite not being a member. In addition, the Presidents of the
European Central Bank and the Eurogroup can be invited to attend discussions on economic and
financial affairs. Beyond this, the EUCO can also invite guests who are not a part of the EU system:
the Secretaries-General of NATO or the UN, for instance, and recently the President of Ukraine
have all been invited as guests to parts of the proceedings. So, we know who takes part, and what
they do, now let’s look at how they do it. The European Council generally operates according to
consensus. This means that decisions are adopted only if no member opposes the motion: rather than
holding a formal vote yay or nay, the members are simply given the opportunity to object. This,
along with the understanding that the details of each discussion remain private among the members,
serves to create a collegiate atmosphere oriented around problem-solving, where no one is afraid to
speak their mind. Now, your immediate reaction might be to ask why this is the case. Part of it
is practical: a European Council summit usually takes place over two days and needs to cover
a lot of ground. So, the leaders need to work efficiently. Working according to consensus means
that in areas where there is disagreement, the discussions can focus directly on the issues of
most pressing concern for each objecting Member, and negotiations can start from there until
every side is satisfied. The other part is more structural. First, the meetings are pre-prepared
by the President, who consults closely with the Commission President and each of the leaders
between meetings. Part of this preparation is the drafting and revision of the European Council
conclusions that is done with the Committee of Permanent Representatives (COREPER II), staffed
by representatives from each Member State, and the General Affairs Council configuration, the monthly
meeting of the 27 European Affairs Ministers. Second, obviously, the leaders themselves meet
each other bilaterally between meetings too! In other words, there is plenty of room to
consider the issues under discussion in-between the major summits. So, no-one arrives unprepared,
and by the time the leaders gather in one room, the areas where decisions are needed are normally
only those that are most pressing and most difficult. In cases where agreement can’t be
reached, naturally the discussion carries on. This means that there is a real feeling of ‘ownership’
over any eventual agreement by consensus. But the risk of non-agreement is also a source of
criticism against consensus as a working practice: where there is no agreement,
it can risk gridlock or serve to ‘water down’ any eventual decision. If there is a legal need
to take a vote, then the system functions like the one we discussed for the Council of the EU
in episode 2: unanimity, qualified majority, and simple majority are the three options, and
which one should be used is defined by the treaty. For example, when electing its own President,
nominating a candidate for President of the Commission, or appointing the High Representative
in agreement with the Commission President, the decision is made by qualified majority.
The voting systems are another area where some people criticise the system. For instance, in a
difficult geopolitical landscape, the fact that measures within the Common Foreign and Security
Policy require unanimity has led some to question exactly how geopolitical an actor the EU can be
with its current decision-making set-up, and there is an ongoing debate about whether extending the
use of qualified majority voting could be a way forward. On the one hand, this would make it
easier to make decisions, since there would be a lower threshold of agreement. On the other hand,
there is a risk that this would jeopardise the EUCO as a club of equals, leading to more
polarisation between the leaders and difficulties further down the line. There are also fundamental
legal questions about how such a change might be made: after all, extending QMV would itself
have to be a decision taken by unanimity, so the conversation is ongoing. So, here we see again
the real control that national leaders have over the Union: the nationally elected Heads of State
or Government discuss as a ‘club’ and decide either by consensus once everyone is satisfied,
or by one of three voting methods as applicable. The impetus truly comes from the leaders in all
areas. Let’s finish by looking at the outputs it produces to communicate those decisions. At
the close of each meeting, the European Council produces ‘conclusions’ that set out its agreed
view and decision in a number of areas. Naturally, as a forum between 27 Member States, the language
of the European Council conclusions is always very carefully drafted. Conclusions are agreed
by consensus during each summit and published at the end of the meeting. They can vary in length,
and their language can be quite difficult to understand to anyone but the closest observers.
But the main takeaway is that they are the primary day-to-day tool the EUCO uses to fulfil its role
of setting the EU’s agenda. But every five years, the European Council produces a much
more ambitious document: the Strategic Agenda. In the context of European elections and ahead
of the appointment of the new Commission, each Strategic Agenda lays the groundwork for EU action
in the subsequent legislative term. It serves as a plan to guide the Union through whatever situation
may unfold over the course of the coming term. So, let’s conclude by looking at the European
Council conclusions of June 2024, which is when the current Strategic Agenda was adopted. They
showcase a little bit of everything we’ve been discussing. In these conclusions, the EUCO first
goes through its usual role of addressing issues of common concern and communicating the leaders’
agreements. First, matters of complex geopolitical significance and crises are at the forefront,
so we see first-hand the role of the EUCO in trying to deal with the most difficult issues
facing Europe. Second, the conclusions show us the EUCO’s role in tasking other institutions: setting
implementation goals for the Commission. Third, we see the EUCO’s role in making appointments to the
‘top jobs’: the EUCO’s decisions on who to elect or nominate to the positions of EUCO President,
Commission President, and High Representative, all figure in the conclusions. Finally,
they adopt the 2024-2029 Strategic Agenda, giving guidance to the Union in the coming years. There
is actually much more than that in the most recent conclusions, as there always is – these
are important documents after all, reflecting the status of the institution that produces them. The
June 2024 conclusions also include, for instance, a road map on future internal reforms to the EU,
recalling the role of national impetus in the development of the European project over the
years. As far as the European Council itself is concerned, it’s perhaps most revealing to look at
the introduction of the 2024-2029 Strategic Agenda that was just adopted. It briefly lays out some of
the EU’s achievements in recent years: each one is framed as something the Union has achieved
“together”. From the early days of informal summits in the 1960s to today’s club of leaders,
the importance of working “together” is at the heart of the European Council’s role.
If you want to learn about the history of the EUCO in more depth, be sure to check
out this episode of EU History Explained. And if you want to learn how to read and
understand the European Council conclusions, check out this episode of EuropeChats.
Посмотреть больше похожих видео
Is the EU democratic? The role of the European Commission | #EUDemocracyExplained
Is the EU Democratic? Part 2 – the Council of the European Union | #EUDemocracyExplained
Is the EU democratic? Part 3 - Representation in the European Parliament | #EUDemocracyExplained
Arrêt Costa c/. Enel : La Primauté du Droit de l'Union Européenne (CJUE/CJCE, 15 juillet 1964)
Les géants du numérique sont-ils plus puissants que les États ?
Board Game Business Podcast - How to Get Into Distribution
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)