Prof. Dr. Carlos J. Moreiro Ganzález Jean Monnet Chair in European Union Law (Universidad Carlos III de Madrid)

Transcription

1 Prof. Dr. Carlos J. Moreiro Ganzález Jean Monnet Chair in European Union Law (Universidad Carlos III de Madrid) GOVERNING GLOBALISATION: The answer of Regionalism 1

2 Governing Globalization: The answer of Regionalism Communication given at the Global J. Monnet Conference (ECSA-World Conference) «Europe s challenges in a globalised world» Prof. Dr. Carlos J. Moreiro Ganzález. J. Monnet Chair in European Union Law (Universidad Carlos III de Madrid) Summary: 1.- Introduction 2.- Uncertainty (or Threat ) of Globalisation 3.- Multilateralism and Regionalism as tools for governing Globalisation. 4.- Conclusion I. Introduction Globalisation is a present time phenomenon, which acts as a catalyst of the existing interdependence between the actors of international society 1. Globalisation transnationalizes problems of economic, financial and environmental nature as well as those which are related to security and migration flows, which put the capacity of the State to react in question 2. Nowadays, it seems that only regionalism, which already deals to these threats both, through an institutionalised or a decentralised way, is the only means of cooperation, capable of acting efficiently for the «governing» of Globalisation 3. 1 TOMUSCHAT, C.: International Law: Ensuring the Survival of Mankind on the Eve of a New Century, RCADI, 281, 1999, pp. 9, ss., en p FATOUROS, A. A.: International Law in the Era of Global Integration, en VVAA: Droit et justice. Mélanges Valticos, París, 1999, pp. 131, ss. 3 ORREGO VICUÑA, F.: Derecho Internacional y Sociedad Global, VVAA: «Pacis Artes», Homenaje al Prof. J. D. González Campos, I, Madrid, 2005, pp. 441, ss., en pp

3 I will in the following identify possible threats generated by Globalisation, and distinguish them from those which aren t threats generated by Globalisation. Afterwards I will revise a few elements which are more relevant to the existing multilateral frame which is in force, in order to respond to the mentioned threats, including the politics which has been advocated by the European Union. II. Uncertainty or threats of Globalisation The dichotomy of the causes and effects which are generated by the phenomenon we are dealing with become more and more evident. On one hand it therefore does not seem reasonable to qualify as a relevant threat to the impact in the service sector and, in certain industrial sectors of dislocalisation Certainly at the present time more jobs are created and destroyed within only several months, than by dislocalization within one year. Indeed dislocalization may vary depending on the economic sector; thus, set against services that require an open interaction (i. e. the retail sailing and the sanitary attention), the works of data processing programming and information technology can be carried out from a long distance. Nevertheless, the latter represent a minimum percentage of the total employment of the developed countries 4. On the other hand, the notion of security becomes more complex through globalization so that we are supporting a growing weakness of the State in assuring its main mission of protecting its population and territorial environment 5. Recently, three international authorities of a different area have coincided in identifying the most serious threats to the security of the States. In its sixtieth period of sessions, the General Assembly of the United Nations approved, by means of Resolution, the Final Document of the World Summit The third Part of this resolution (Paragraphs ) omitted certain threats that "do not 4 Fuente, Farell, D. (dir.): Report on the evolution of employment from McKinsey Global Institute, New York, Dic KOLODZIEJ, E. A.: Security and International Relations, Cambridge, 2005, espec. Cap. 3 (Parte I), Cap. 4 (Parte II) y Cap. 8 (Parte III). 6 A/RES/60/1; New York, distribut

4 distinguish national borders (and) are interrelated". Set against them "isolated actions are never the best way for a State to protect itself, (but rather) by means of an efficient collective security system" (Paragraph 72). Those threats had already been indicated previously in the regional framework of the OSCE in Thus, the eleventh meeting of the Cabinet of the OSCE (Maastricht, 1-2/12/2003), acknowledged the polysemic and evolutionary character of these threats by referring to migratory flows, transnational crime, or environmental degradation 7. At the same time, the International Forum of the G-8, identify the instability of the oil market and calls for the creation of an energetic security system that keeps the interests of the entire International Community in mind 8. III. Multilateralism and Regionalism as tools for governing Globalisation. The States should respond to the imperative dictations of globalization by means of multilateral coordination, whose nature may vary according to the type of threat which is to be prevented or eradicated 9. The signing of the Final Act of the Conference on the Security and the Cooperation in Europe (Helsinki, ) constituted a first step in this direction. Document I number 2 of this Act refers to the measures destined to promote confidence and to reinforce certain aspects of security and disarmament. The central idea is "the interrelation among the security of each participating State, the security in Europe in its totality, and the relation that exists with other areas of world security". Hence the Charter of Paris for a New Europe and the Statement of the Summit of Budapest , confirm the postulate that the security of each participating State is linked to that of all the others. The European Union shares from the precautions that configure answers to the challenges of the globalization. 7 Doc. OSCE-MC. DOC/1/03 de , Párrafos 18, y Objetivos de la Presidencia rusa para la Cumbre de San Petersburgo de Julio de VERHOEVEN, J.: Souverineté et mondialisation: Libres propos, VVAA: La mondialisation du droit, París, 2000, pp. 53, ss. 4

5 In one of its most relevant pronouncements on the topic, the European Commission prepared a Communication on the European values in a Globalized World 10, directed at the Informal Meeting of Heads of State and of Government of the EU held in Hampton Court (United Kingdom, ). It can be underlined, similarly, the Communication from the Commission to the Informal Meeting of the European Council in Lahti (Finland) 11, which was held recently ( ). This Meeting raised immigration and the supply of energy as the primary concern for security in Europe, even before the threat of terrorism. Is the Union prepared to respond to the three risks in question?. The most immediate answer, considering the current normative framework, is that it is not. Considering the politics of the EU with respect to these three threats, it becomes evident that these are inefficient because of precariety. Firstly the actions on migration flows lack at least three essential elements, in order to produce satisfactory results: a) the token value of the creation and development of an Agency for External Borders (FRONTEX) 12 cannot hide its lack of financial and material means to cope with the objectives that it has been assigned. FRONTEX designs strategies and posesses the necessary element of human coordination, but once faced with implementation, it turns out to be unfeasible due to its mentioned lack of means. Imagine that an army could not only not win a war, but a mere battle, although it has the best Commander in Chief but without arms and soldiers to create a Company?; b) also lack of a political will to assign the EU with competences in order to create an authentic Immigration Policy. The almost insurmountable division, between the Member States on this subject is the sand that prevents the rotation of the institutional gear of the EU; c) in the meantime, the Twenty-five should develope strategies which unite the matters of both illegal- and legal immigration and the social integration of immigrants. Accordingly agreements of alliance between the Countries 10 COM (2005) 525 f., Brussels, , espec. Paragr. 3.2 y External energy relations from principles to action, COM (2006) 590f, Brussels, Council Regulation (EC) nº 2007/2004 from (O. J. nº L 349, ). 5

6 of origin and traffic should be made, since as is known, the migratory pressure arise from underdevelopment and will not be able to be eliminated through the construction of walls and / or frontier fences. Secondly the lack of an integrated or sole European energy market, intensifies the risk of dependence on outside supplies that affect all member States of the EU on a greater or smaller scale. Paradoxically all successful actions with respect to establishing an organization which is integrated into the energy market are at present only projected toward the southeast of Europe, and ally States that do not belong to the EU yet 13. Also in this area a combination of adequate domestic and external policies is necessary. Those, they will be able to be prompted by the European Council under the German Presidency in the spring of 2007 based upon the European Strategy for an effective, competitive, and sustainable energy", presented by the Commission last March 14. In the meantime, is possible to unfold a specific and coherent foreign policy of the Union in the area of energy, which among other objectives, counteract the tactics of third party energy suppliers that threaten the collective security of the EU. The Commission and the GS/HR (Secretary General of the Council and High Representative of the CFSP) addressed a document to the European Council in Brussels on the , to that end. Finally, the fight against terrorist threats, still assuming the uncertainties which derive from its unforeseeable character and from its diverse nature, seems to have reached a level of satisfactory efficiency. Success which is in the fact based upon an existing coordination between the responsible Organs 15, advantageous intergovernmental coordination within the Third Pillar 16, and political endorsement of all the Institutions of the EU in the fight against terrorism. 13 Council Decision from on the celebration by the EC of the Treaty on the Energy Community. (O. J. nº L 198, ). 14 COM (2006) 105 final. 15 I. E. Council Decision 2003/48/JAI from I. E. Framework Decision of the Council 2002/475/JAI from (OJ nº L 164, ). 6

7 IV. Conclusions It is evident that the slow coming into effect of the European Constitutional Treaty its being a handicap for the provision of tools to the EU on governing globalization. Perhaps it is not idle to remember that this International instrument does not attribute new competences to the EU, but redefines a good part of the objectives and politics which it is now responsible for at present already. The Political Statements, sporadic impulses of the Institutions, and improvisation with respect to means of emergency are hardly useful, but require the adjustments in order to leave the path of migration flows and energy inefficiency. The Union will be more secure with reasonable, foreseeable, and coherent action borne by the solidity of Section 2 of Chapter IV of the Third Part of the Constitutional Treaty (Politics on controls of the borders, asylum and immigration), or Section 10, Chapter III, Part III of this Treaty (Energy). The same can be confirmed of articles III-271 and III-329 (Fight against terrorism). Outside of the framework of the Constitutional Treaty it will be difficult to reach better results. To speak in simple terms, Europe cannot appease the brave sea of globalization based on throwing spoons of water in a bucket of greater or smaller size. 7