The EU: an ‘Ode to Joy’ or a pyre for sovereignty?

The threats confronting Europe today are erga omnes in character: both internal and external, they touch the fundamental collective interests of European societies and of the international order itself. Within Europe, the erosion of the rule of law in certain Member States, the rise of illiberal regimes, political polarisation and the spread of hate speech all weaken the shared values of democracy, pluralism and minority protection.

Beyond its borders, the Union faces Russia’s aggression against Ukraine, systemic tensions with China and an uncertain reshaping of the transatlantic relationship, developments that threaten both the continent’s security and the multilateral architecture founded on the United Nations Charter. At the same time, the European Union must reduce its digital, energy, technological and security dependencies, even as climate change, cyber-attacks, information interference and the erosion of universal human-rights standards compound its vulnerabilities.

Together, these trends threaten the Union and its legal order, founded on the primacy of European law and mutual respect for the decisions of its courts, while weakening its ability to speak and act with one voice on the international stage. They turn the defence of the rule of law, democracy and the climate into challenges that are simultaneously domestic and global: failure to address them affects not merely individual European states, but the international community as a whole. At a time when the European Union is confronting this succession of crises and challenges, sovereignty has returned to the centre of public debate, invoked by opposing political forces and too often reduced to caricature. Against this backdrop, and with forthcoming elections liable to become referendums for or against the Union itself, this article addresses several fundamental questions.

First, what does it still mean for a European state to be ‘sovereign’ in the twenty-first century, and how can shared sovereignty within the EU enhance, rather than diminish, the capacity of nations to act? Second, how can Europe overcome the paralysis of ‘veto-ocracy’ and conflicts over sovereignty-political as well as jurisdictional-in order to make the EU both more effective and more legitimate in the eyes of its citizens? Finally, what combination of voluntary differentiation, enhanced cooperation and institutional reform might allow Europe to move towards a ‘federation of nation-states’, reconciling national autonomy, pooled resources and democratic accountability? By casting light on these questions, this article seeks to contribute to the European electoral debate and to show that sovereignty is not the exclusive preserve of anti-Europeans.

Embraced as a form of shared European sovereignty, it can instead become the essential instrument of a stronger Europe and more influential nations, without effacing their distinct cultural identities.