Washington State Model United Nations 2007

Washington State Model United Nations 2007

1

European Union Dear Delegates, Welcome to Washington State Model United Nations 2007 and this committee, the European Union! Regardless of your previous Model United Nations experience I know that you will have a great time at this year’s conference. The European Union (EU) committee represents a unique opportunity to discuss issues of great importance in today’s world. Our two topics are both contentious and complex and should be very interesting to research and debate. With the recent emphasis on immigration policy and failure of the EU constitution, there is much information and debate to explore. My name is David Wilkerson and I will be your chair for the simulation. I am a senior at the University of Washington. I am majoring in Economics and Political Science, both fields that I decided on in part due to my involvement in Model United Nations and a general interest in international affairs. I have participated in several MUN conferences as a delegate and I was the chair of UNESCAP at last year’s WASMUN conference. I look forward to meeting all of you and working with you to explore these two very interesting topics relating to the EU, immigration and the EU constitution. Please email me with any questions you have about research, writing position papers, or any aspect of the conference, I will be happy to assist you. David Wilkerson Chair, European Union [email protected]


2

Overview of the European Union: Though several regional groups preceded the European Union, the modern EU was created with the Treaty of Maastricht in 1992. The ramifications of the EU for member nations’ sovereignty are enormous. The EU is based on cooperation and common policy between governments, including the elimination of trade barriers and the creation of a single market. In 2002 the Euro became the standard currency across the European Union, with 12 of 15 nations abandoning their national currencies. It is important to note that the foundation for rapid integration began to be laid immediately following World War II, and that Europeans have become used to the idea of reduced national sovereignty.1 Structure: Currently the European Union is organized based on a broad ‘three pillars’ structure. The three pillars are the European Communities (EC), Common Foreign and Security Policy and Police and Judicial Cooperation in Criminal Matters. The pillars are ordered by their relative strength, with the EC being home to the strongest institutions, such as the Single Market and Economic and Monetary Union. For the purposes of this committee, the European Communities pillar will be most relevant. The European Communities encompasses the three primary governing bodies of the EU.

1. The European Commission functions as the executive branch of the EU. 25 Commissioners work to suggest and enforce legislation, aided by thousands of civil servants. Representatives to the EC are expected to represent the interests of the EU as a whole, and not their home nations.

2. The Council of the European Union is the main legislative body, but most decisions are made with the agreement of the European Parliament. The Council passes law forwarded from the Commission and Parliament. The Council is composed of ministers from each member state.

3. The European Parliament is the directly elected legislative body of the EU. While it cannot propose legislation, it does have veto and amendment power in most cases.

Legislative Process: Legislation moves through the European Union in one of three ways, depending on what area the legislation falls under.

1 http://europa.eu/abc/12lessons/index2_en.htm


3

1. Codecision: The primary system is the “codecision procedure” where the EC proposes

legislation to the Council and Parliament, and the Council and Parliament agree on the legislation before it is adopted. If disagreements arise, the Council and Parliament convene a joint committee to work through differences, and the Parliament has the ability to reject with a simple majority if an agreement cannot be reached. This process controls worker movement, a key aspect of Topic 1. 2. Consultation:

Similar to the codecision procedure, the consultation procedure again involves all three decision-making bodies. In the consultation procedure, the Council merely seeks the opinion of the Parliament, and the Parliament may suggest amendments. Depending on the issue the consultation is either mandatory or recommended. The key is that Parliament cannot prevent passage of legislation. This process does cover immigration to the EU. 3. Cooperation: The cooperation procedure is infrequently used primarily because it was a precursor to the codecision procedure. It is still used for some economic issues, but is not relevant to our topics.

Other legislative procedures: Assent – Assent is basically a version of the consultation procedure which requires majority assent for legislation by the Parliament, with no chance for amendments. It is used in specific cases, none of which are relevant for our topics.

Two procedures allow legislation to be passed without the involvement of Parliament. The Commission and Council can act alone, and the Commission in some limited cases can act without the involvement of either other branch. Of interest is the ability of the Commission to act alone regarding rights of workers to stay in their state of employment.

The organization and operation of the EU decision-making process is complex and sometimes confusing. This stems from the fact that the structure has been built over time and each successive ‘layer’ has overlapped with previous practices. For the purposes of our simulation we will try to simplify the process a bit since we cannot simulate all three legislative bodies.


4

WASMUN EU Procedure: Topic 1. Immigration: Immigration seems to fall into two of the decision making procedures, possibly three. For the purposes of the simulation we will create our own procedure, drawing on different aspects of the three body multipart decision making process of the EU. The Council often uses Qualified Majority Voting (QMV) in its decision making process, and in other cases uses unanimity. For this topic we will use the QMV procedure.

QMV rules – Each country will be assigned a number of votes based on population, and 72% will be the percent of the total votes needed to pass a resolution. Voting Weights:2

2 Numbers from: http://ec.europa.eu/archives/igc2000/geninfo/fact-sheets/fact-sheet8/index_en.htm

Country Votes Country Votes Austria 10 Latvia 4

Azerbaijan Bangladesh

Belarus Belgium 12 Lithuania 7 Benin Bolivia

Botswana Brazil

Bulgaria Cambodia Cameroon

Canada Chad Chile China

Colombia Democratic

Republic of the Congo

Republic of the Congo (Congo)

Costa Rica Cote D'Ivoire

Cuba Czech Republic 12 Luxembourg 4


5

Topic 2. EU Constitution: All resolutions must pass unanimously. Topic 1: Immigration Regulation The European Union has always incorporated the ideal of freedom of movement in its basic concept. However, the economic disparities between nations in the EU have led to increasing concern in wealthy nations about intra-EU migration. The EU also faces a challenge from external immigration, both legal and illegal. Immigration is an issue that highlights the challenges inherent in integration and the economic disparities between EU member states. Immigration also poses a challenge due to its geographical variation. Member states are often reluctant to spend money to stop illegal immigration that is occurring in a different nation. Past EU Action: Throughout the early periods of European integration, immigration was generally the responsibility of individual nations. With the tightening of the European community after 1992, a series of treaties incorporated free movement within the EU into the Maastricht Treaty. The general principle is that member citizens do not even need a passport to freely travel between nations, and visitors only need one visa to travel throughout the EU. These rules were established

Denmark 7 Malta 3 Djibouti

DPR Korea Ecuador

Egypt Estonia 4 Netherlands 13 Ethiopia

Fiji Finland 7 Poland 27 France 29 Portugal 12 Ghana

Germany 29 Slovakia 7 Greece 12 Slovenia 4

Guatemala Guinea

Honduras Hungary 12 Spain 27

India Indonesia

Iran Iraq

Ireland 7 Sweden 10 Israel Italy 29 United Kingdom 29

Japan Kenya Kuwait

Total 317 Votes to Pass 228


6

by the Schengen Agreement which has been adopted in stages by 16 member nations. Notably, the UK has not signed the agreement. In essence, nations have been able to retain control over immigration by refusing to sign the agreement. This is more complex than it seems because in the political arena, opening a country to immigration can be a bargaining chip when dealing with Eastern European nations. Of course this bargain often carries with it a domestic cost, as national sentiments usually run against liberal immigration policies. On the issue of illegal immigration, the EU has made less progress. Currently, the EU is dedicated to creating a uniform policy dealing with all aspects of illegal immigration. This will include standards for detention and return and respect for human rights and “fundamental freedoms”.3 Illegal immigration has been challenging for the EU to deal with because of the geographical component. Spain serves as the primary route for African immigrants, and has requested help in dealing with the problem.4 Spain has come under fire for offering amnesty for illegal immigrants, thereby encouraging further immigration, while also asking for money to help combat the problem.5 Current Atmosphere: Many nations in the European Union are torn between embracing the ideal of integration and dealing with the harsh realities of immigration and free movement. Many see immigration as a threat to domestic jobs, especially in the case of Eastern European migration. Foreign immigration is also a concern, heightened by terrorist attacks in Madrid and London. The perils of immigration are also on display in France, where a poorly integrated Muslim community has exploded. French police reported 2,500 violent attacks in the first 6 months of 2006.6 Spain absorbs a great share of illegal immigration due to its proximity to Africa. Spain’s amnesty program has been controversial, and other EU states have been very critical of the policy. Spain has stepped up patrols, but the overall economic benefit to Spain may be positive.7 Events such as these will only heighten domestic opposition to immigration in member nations. Possible Solutions/Committee Objective: The immigration issue boils down to two main questions, what to do about external immigration and how to fairly manage intra-EU immigration. In terms of intra-EU immigration, some have suggested more control be given back to the member states, and some states, notably the UK, have retained control over immigration from certain member countries, such as the ascendant Bulgaria and Romania. This solution is not without drawbacks, as it violates the basic EU principle of freedom of movement between all member states. Foreign immigration needs a solution based on a common policy with a fair distribution of financial responsibility. The need for control over EU borders must be balanced with the EU policy of supporting human rights and the extension of asylum to eligible foreign nationals. This committee will have the task of 3 http://ec.europa.eu/justice_home/fsj/immigration/fsj_immigration_intro_en.htm 4 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/5369986.stm 5 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/5369986.stm 6 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/24/AR2006102401148.html 7 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6152252.stm


7

debating and determining a fair way to control population movement in light of the ideals of freedom and human rights embraced by the EU. Bloc Positions: Bloc positions on the issue of immigration will generally be determined by the location and economic status of a particular nation. Eastern Europe – Most of these former Soviet states have relatively weak economies compared to western Europe, leading to a depression in wages. Skilled laborers have migrated in great numbers to western Europe in the years since the liberalization of intra-EU migration laws, and this has created some controversy. In general, the governments of nations with net population outflows have been persistent in working to convince western European nations to open their borders to immigration because of the value of remittances sent back to the source nation. Population outflows also ease the burden on the government in terms of unemployment problems. Western Europe – In general these states have powerful, well-developed economies that serve as a powerful lure to intra-EU and external immigration. There is often a domestic demand for skilled tradesmen and craftsmen that are plentiful in Eastern Europe. To some degree, most of these nations need immigrants to fill in the lower-paying positions in the economy, but immigrant communities can become marginalized because of their economic status. In addition, immigrants may have difficulty finding work, especially if they are undocumented or unable to speak the local language. Domestic politics often focus on the possibility that immigrant labor is stealing jobs from native citizens. The tension created by the benefits and drawbacks of immigration is seen in every developed nation. “Conduit” Nations – A few nations in Europe, primarily Spain, bear the brunt of often illegal African immigration. These nations usually have the most notable and debated immigration positions because of the great affect immigration has on their nations. Since these nations serve as a conduit for immigrants, appeals to other nations for help are a key part of their policy. Domestic policies in these nations come under special scrutiny because of the need to present a consistent image towards other EU nations. For example, concessions to immigrants domestically may undermine appeals to the EU community for help in controlling immigration. It is important to remember that the categories laid out above are very general, and some nations will be exceptions to the geographical and economic rules. The politics of the EU process can also lead to bloc defection, making thorough research very important. A nation may break from its natural bloc position in order to gain support for some other EU initiative that it wants to see implemented. Research Tips:

In order to be able to understand where your nation’s immigration policy comes from, you must understand the immigration issue in the context of the entire EU. Since you will be


8

working with other EU nations to solve this problem, it is important to have an idea of how different nations are dealing with the immigration question. A good grasp of the issue in context will help you make sense of immigration policies that can be counter-intuitive.

The first question to answer when researching your nation’s stance on immigration policy is if your nation is absorbing immigrants or losing emigrants. The EU publishes statistical data8 that answers this question, and seeing the numbers can give you an idea of the scope of population movement.

Since the immigration issue is very topical, local news sources can be very useful in determining what local politicians and EU representatives are thinking and saying. Examining the positions of political parties can also be helpful in understanding the debate. Watch out for sources that may appear unbiased, but are actually promoting an agenda, often by misusing statistics. Topic 1 Specific Research Links: http://ec.europa.eu/justice_home/fsj/immigration/fsj_immigration_intro_en.htm Official EU site covering recent and historical developments http://news.google.com Search for EU immigration information http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/euimmigration/ Interesting and comprehensive source for news and analysis complied by a Harvard-educated Slovenian lawyer.

8 http://ec.europa.eu/justice_home/doc_centre/asylum/statistics/docs/2001/immi_emigration_en.pdf


9

Topic 2: The EU Constitution The EU Constitution has been created in order to clarify the layers and layers of treaties that have created the current EU system. The Constitution aims to simplify the operation of the EU and clearly lay out how the EU is to operate. Another aim is to provide for a more democratic political process, including the ability of EU citizens to directly create political initiatives. The Co-decision procedure will become even more widespread in decision making, and more power will also be given to national legislative bodies. After the Constitution was finalized, there was great optimism in the EU for quick passage and adoption of the document. All major political parties favored the document, and in many cases both the ruling and opposition parties in various nations supported the document. When France and the Netherlands rejected the EU Constitution last spring it came as somewhat of a surprise. Since this rejection, the EU has been indecisive in terms of a response, with most leaders preferring to step back and wait rather than take action regarding some of the problems that have been identified with the Constitution. Problems: Despite the general support for the Constitution, the longstanding criticisms of the document have jumped to the forefront after the French and Dutch rejection. The following are some of the problems broadly associated with the Constitution:

The document itself is not easy to read for two reasons. It is very long, over 60,000 words and this, coupled with the often difficult language, makes the prospect of reading it daunting even to an interested citizen, much less an average citizen. Even the summary of the constitution available on the EU website is a difficult read. This inaccessibility means that certain pieces of the Constitution can be taken by political groups and touted as evidence that the Constitution will negatively affect certain constituencies, even if the piece in question is already a part of EU law.

The loss of sovereignty is another concern under the proposed Constitution. The Constitution would reduce the areas where a unanimous decision is required, instead relying more on Qualified Majority Voting, meaning that states can no longer rely on having veto power over legislation that undermines their sovereignty.

Another argument concerns the continued lack of democratic responsiveness by the EU. Since Commissioners are appointed by their home country government rather than elected, they are not as accountable to the citizenry as many would like. Some argue that the new initiative system is not really significant because it could still be bypassed.

- Economic tension has been created on both sides of the Constitutional debate. There is fear that the EU goal of market integration and free capital and goods markets will undermine the more socialist systems in some nations. On the other side of the debate some argue that by supporting some centralized economic planning and workers’ rights the Constitution will impose socialistic systems on member states.

- Various other complaints are voiced by special interest NGOs, who fault the Constitution for omissions on issues such as human rights. In general, these objections


10

are on shaky ground as some are already covered in existing treaties; many do not have the appeal necessary to gain inclusion.

The various problems identified in the Constitution are in some ways indicative of just how hard it is to decipher the rules that govern the EU. Most objections to the Constitution are countered by EU officials who point out that most disputed points are already in operation under current treaties. This may explain why the governments of all member nations seemed ready to accept the Constitution, while the citizens of France and the Netherlands were not. The French opposition focused primarily on how the economic and social ramifications of the Constitution would move Europe, and by extension France, away from dearly held social values.9 The French opposition was interesting in that the ruling and opposition parties supported the Constitution. There is some speculation that the rejection was also due to anger at the current French political establishment, especially President Chirac.10 In the Netherlands, rejection was based on a broad range of complaints, but the general thrust was similar to French concerns that the Constitution would eliminate many of the social programs treasured by the Dutch.11 The Dutch experience is demonstrative of the alienation many EU citizens feel towards the complex and often unresponsive EU governance system. Current State of Affairs: After the rejection of the EU Constitution in the Netherlands and France many EU nations delayed their own votes on the Constitution indefinitely, primarily because the Constitution requires unanimous ratification. The general atmosphere surrounding the next step is one of confusion and anger. Many politicians are upset that their hard work on the Constitution was in vain because of misguided fears and misinformation spread by marginal political parties. For many citizens, the failure of the Constitution is viewed as a long overdue signal to the EU leadership to pay more attention to the people of the EU. Many EU leaders have adopted a ‘wait and see’ strategy with the Constitution, unwilling to start over and unwilling to attempt to modify the Constitution. Possible Solutions/Committee Objective: Not many specific solutions have been offered; however, there is some talk of a new constitutional convention culminating with a new round of voting in 2009.12 For the purposes of our simulation, we will operate as a type of Constitutional convention, with the power to be very creative in coming up with solutions. The current Constitution could be modified, divided up and voted on in pieces, simplified, or even abandoned. Of course, with only two days we will not be able to work with the 60,000 word document itself, but the primary areas of dissension can be addressed. 9 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4592691.stm 10 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4592691.stm 11 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4601731.stm 12 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_establishing_a_Constitution_for_Europe


11

Bloc Positions: The Constitution was expected to pass ratification in all nations, but failed in France and the Netherlands, resulting in the cancellation or postponement in many other states. Bloc positions on the current version of the Constitution can be divided into For, Against, and Undecided. Below is a map identifying the status of the Constitution in each nation:

Image from Wikipedia, GPU Free Documentation License.


12

In terms of the debate over how to proceed next, bloc positions break down a bit, and individual nations often have their own ideas. It will be most useful to identify with blocs organized by similarities between states in terms of the problems identified with the EU Constitution. For example, nations with primarily socialist economic organization may identify with each other on the issue of the free market approach of the EU. Research Tips:

Our simulation will be more effective and fun if delegates do not limit themselves to the official ‘wait and see’ stance of many leaders, so delegates should look at the various Constitutional issues and how they affect their country. With this information, it will be easy to organize into various blocs in committee and debate the primary flaws in the EU Constitution, avoiding the paralysis currently gripping many European leaders (some of whom are likely just awaiting their inevitable loss of office).

For this topic, local news sources will again be useful in determining the sentiments of each individual state’s population towards the various constitutional issues. Government and EU sources will probably not be as useful as they do not provide much in the way of solutions or creative ideas. This topic is a great opportunity to apply your understanding of your country in order to create original solutions. Suggested solutions do not have to follow the explicit government policy, as is the case in most MUN debates, as long as they accurately reflect the unique situations of each nation and are grounded in fact-based research. Read into government policy to determine what the government plans to do about the issue in the future, as most governments do have fairly specific plans but for now have adopted passive attitude. Topic 2 Specific Research Links: http://europa.eu/constitution/index_en.htm Official EU Constitution site with summaries and useful FAQs, remember this is the official EU site so it is biased in favor of the Constitution and will counter criticisms. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/2950276.stm BBC summary of the Constitution http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3954327.stm BBC overview of state positions http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_establishing_a_Constitution_for_Europe Wikipedia Constitution Article http://www.vote-no.com/home/home.aspx Primary anti-EU Constitution group, useful for understanding arguments against the Constitution.


13

General Research Links http://europa.eu/ EU Homepage – A great resource but a little hard to navigate because of the sheer volume of documents and pages. http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/index.html Portal to EU Law – Good place to look up regulations, also has concise summaries of different procedures. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union Wikipedia entry point for EU topics – One of the best resources for learning the basics of the EU, the EU section is one of the better Wikipedia sections I have seen. http://www.euractiv.com/en/HomePage Good source of news and topic information http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/europe/2003/inside_europe/default.stm BBC EU Portal http://proquest.com General news and article search http://news.google.com Far reaching news search https://cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/ CIA World Factbook – Source for descriptive statistics about nations

Washington State Model United Nations 2007

Documents

Transcript of Washington State Model United Nations 2007