The integration of Europe continues to develop with the efforts of a few organizations and the increase and diversification of relations between nations. The Council of Europe, the oldest of these organizations, is developing norms for a variety of areas, starting with the field of human rights, and preparing agreements that will lead to cross border cooperation between states in many fields. In the meantime, NATO is trying to provide security for states that share certain values and a common heritage. The organization that is trying to achieve this in the broadest manner possible, while trying to bring Europe together, is the European Union.

Which countries will be taken into this union? How will national sovereignty be effected? The future of the European Parliament, as well as national parliaments, and the future of European agreements are all being debated today, just as they always have been. The most important topic of concern among these is undoubtedly the extent to which national sovereignty will be affected under European integration. It can be said that as integration progresses, the authority and the powers that belong to the state will take the shape in the following chart.

European governments and nations are seriously debating and searching for answers to the question of the transfer of authority to supranational organizations, as well as to private economic organizations - and even to local governments – in a Europe that is moving rapidly towards a single currency. Even countries that are refusing to accept the single currency have consented to leaving the decisions on economic integration and foreign trade to the European Council, the European Commission, and, to an extent, to the European Parliament.

In addition, efforts are also underway among member states aimed at harmonizing their social, domestic, and legal systems according to certain norms.

In opposition to this, however, is the fact that recommendations sometimes put forward by certain European leaders to the effect that the EU should become an intergovernmental organization with a single Constitution and be based on a federal or a confederal system, is still received coolly by people in many member states..

Even though Europeans continue to display a will for close and peaceful cooperation with other Europeans and continue to make sacrifices in terms of abrogating from national sovereignty, they are not ready to give up on their national identities. Even if they talk about common values, democracy, human rights, and the market economy, these are no longer things that are exclusive to Europe. As for culture and religion, Europe is heterogeneous in this respect.

We can say, therefore, that European identity, which has not emerged so far, will emerge as a result of nations, peoples, and corporations living together under the banner of shared values, cultures and experiences over time. Developments show that EU members are increasing the steps that will speed up the attainment of a European identity based on shared values.

Although Europe tries to give the impression of a state with a shared foreign and security policy, with its European Security and Defense Policy (ESDP), it has not been able to free itself from the shortcomings that generally characterize multinational organizations.

The rejection by the people of Ireland of the Nice Treaty, which foresees better policy implementation by the EU, but which also decreases the influence of smaller members, has shown that there  is a resistance to the notion of sharing national sovereignty in Europe.

It appears that reluctance in the face of transition to supranational organs will continue for some time and that European countries will not easily give up on the notion of the nation state that stems from the French revolution.

It is, however, a fact that the increased sharing of the sub-organizations in the nation sate with civilian groups and local governments and the diversification and spread of privatization will ease the transfer of authority to supranational organizations. 

But it is still not possible, to say that there are sufficient developments in terms of a domestic transferring of powers to precipitate the establishment of a "United States of Europe."

While local governments in Great Britain, Germany, Spain, Belgium, and Italy have been provided with advanced levels of autonomy, central governments and parliaments are still in possession of vast powers that appear very difficult to give up.      

Heading the list of problems faced by an EU trying to work out its future and go for greater union in the coming years, is the need to define more clearly the authority of the EU and the member states, and to find the mechanism that will follow this separation. Naturally, when such a division of authority and responsibility is being realized, the principle of decision making in close cooperation with the public has to be protected.

The Council of Europe will issue a declaration on this subject at the end of its meeting in December 2001. If this declaration is going to be more than just a collection of words then it has to  represent the common view of member states (including prospective members) before anything else. In fact, revolutionary steps should not be expected for  the EU, which is an intergovernmental organization, to take over a great extent of the responsibilities of nation states.    

The reason for this, of course, is the fact that there continues to be a great reluctance in transferring national authority to the EU. For example, not all member states have joined the single currency or the Schengen Agreement on the free circulation of people. The Nice Treaty, on the other hand, has been vetoed by the people of Ireland.    

Many large European countries, including Turkey, are still not prepared to transfer their authority to any great extent to the EU. Therefore, it appears that it will be appropriate if the EU's authority covers every area needed for the proper functioning of this large market, and to try and bring harmony and develop shared norms in the areas of foreign and security policy on the basis of sharing.     

The transfer of authority by member states to the EU is a process that is parallel to the transferring of authority by the nation state to local governments and to civilian organizations. These two processes are in fact mutually supporting each other. 

In this case, it is clear that the process of increasing the authority of the EU has to encourage the nation state to bring its decision-making mechanisms closer to people. Even if the distribution of authority in this sense in an EU member state leads to divisions of discrimination, given that it will lead to a new union centered around the EU.

In opposition to this, however, there is the fact that candidate countries, which have discernible and strong ethnic and national minorities, believe that the transfer of power locally in this way will bring division and separatism with it. This concern exists in all the countries of eastern and southeastern Europe, which are candidates for membership to the EU, and in all Mediterranean countries that are members today.

It is hoped, given this situation, that  the EU, at least while it continues with its enlargement process, will act cautiously with regard to the transfer of authority at the national level to lower levels of administration, and will leave it to the nation states involved to determine the speed with which they want to proceed in this regard.
      
The EU's Charter of Basic Rights, on the other hand, is based on the same, principles that the Council of Europe's European Convention on Human Rights, which all EU members are party to as members of the Council of Europe. Given this, it would have a less divisive effect if the EU were to adopt the Council of Europe's conventions on this topic rather than trying to create a separate charter. As it is, the EU has already become a party to many of the Council of Europe's conventions.
     
While it is desirable that many of the founding treaties of the EU should be simplified and made more comprehendible, it is inevitable that this process of simplification will result in a change of meaning in many cases. The issue of more democratic legitimacy and transparency for European organizations and bringing these organizations closer to the people is one of the recent principle topics of debate.

The fact that the decisions taken by European commissioners, who are appointed by member states, and the decisions taken by ministers and representatives in the European Council are tantamount to law, means that these decisions fall outside the scrutiny of national parliaments and are, therefore, lacking in terms of democratic legitimacy. The need to overcome this shortcoming is increasing by the day.

This is why it is important to define the role of national parliaments in the new European architecture and to clarify the relationship between, these parliaments and the European Parliament, which is vested with fewer powers. While various ideas are being put forward in this respect, there is a problem. It is not clear just how much support the transfer of authority to the EU in this regard has among the people of member states.