Mark

True, but Russia has 145 million people. Germany has 83 million. If their vote was adjusted to prevent their vote being overwhelming, I don't see how Russians could accept it.

Jayjay

EU is traditionally an economical, geographical and "let's not go to war with each other every other decade" kind of alliance. It's not about bringing rest of the world to its kness, or striking down American hegemony. My guess is that almost every EU member nation feels first and foremost an independent nation, and see EU as "them", and outside agent of sorts. Euro-skepticism as practised by UK for instance is not something that rest of the Europe (or at least, Europeans) condemn, I just can't see UK being made to "choose" between US and EU as long as they can keep good relations with both. Someone said that UK is a bridge between the two, and I must concur. Furthermore, that's one bridge nobody really wants to burn.

Jat

Trading with the Americans is more convenient, but not more profitable.

Jat

You'll be a full member once you start to use the Euro dollar.

Jat

So, when are you going to replace the pound with the Euro and be a full member?

meritocrat

Membership of European Monetary Union is not required for any member-state of the EU.

Lamunus

Canada's entry to the EU is a moot point. It was discussed in the 70's, due to the fact that the Canadians would love the multicultural, tri-lingual nature of Brussels and bring much to the table. But Brussels didn't want to know. The EU is built from the 18th Century designs of a European state that pre-date the rise of nationalism under Napoleon et al. It is hard enough to build a federal state on the loose foundation of pan-European identity (this is growing, particularly among the young, but is still extremely fragile.)

Whatever the benefits of admitting Brazil, Canada or anyone else, it would make the EU nothing more than a large free trade area - the ambition of all British Conservatives. Boo and indeed, hiss. Morocco (and I think, Israel!) applied to join, but were turned down on these grounds. Turkey is still a possible member, but not before the Cyprus question is resolved and the Kurds in Turkey's south-east given true equality (though this is improving because the EU is offering membership, the unique foreign policy tool of the EU in the Balkans)

Economically, the EU and the US are virtually 1:1 - Trade Commissioner Pascal Lamy meets his American counterpart as an equal. For Europe's diplomatic Commissioner to do the same, it will mean that Blair's vision for the future of Europe will have to be defeated in favour of the Gaullist France and Germany. Now Tony is a committed European, once tipped to be the first European President. But as a British Prime Minister, he did the same as so many of his predecessors and chose America over Europe.

In my view, this once again comes down to money. To assure the long term stability of the British economy, Blair has to assure that American investment continues to come thick and steady. This has what the much vaunted special relationship has always guaranteed for Britain, and so there was not really a decision for Blair when it comes to Iraq.

Blair could have teamed up with Chirac and Schroeder and gone to Washington last Autumn and said simply, "no." Europe would have been united without any British lead to the pro-war camp, and the punch this would have packed for Bush may even have been enough to stop the war. But by putting his money on Europe, he is placing the future of the British economy in this European project still very much an experiment. More, by creating this separate pole of influence, there would be no more American guarantee on European security, and the subsequent armament could condemn the world and yet another generation of Europeans to standoff, uncertainty and possible conflict. American de facto vassalage does at least mean continued peace and prosperity for Europe, even if the rest of the world gets progressively fucked from behind. This choice has to be at least considered, and at the moment, it appears to have prevalence over European politicians.

If America does continue down its current "God"-given path, and continues to act with a sheer lack of any diplomatic finesse by drifting into a larger-scale war in the Middle East, British politicians will have to side with Europe if they want to keep their jobs. Despite all the bellicose crap spewed by many British newspapers, we are still Europeans and have the same fundamental beliefs of the Continent.

Answerer

Actually, the pope and various conservatives groups in Europe are against the idea of allowing what they called a muslim and non-European state (Turkey) to join EU.

EU still got lots of things to solve, first they got their current disputes and divisions over Iraq to resolve. Next, they need to solve the economical problems of those countries under Soviet control before the cold wars. And of course, we mustn't forget the various rightist parties and fundamentalist groups who is starting to revive in France, Germany, etc. Last but not least, they need to define "What an Europeon is all about?" Is it really anyone with a critizenship in 'Europe'? Or is it just someone with golden hairs and speak any Europeon languages?

Jat

But a common currency does make it much easier to conduct trade. Which would you perfer to trade with. A country with the same currency as you, thus making it unnecessary to convert between the two, or a country with a different currency with the extra cost of converting? Eventually you're going to have to change.

Jat

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Lamunus
Canada's entry to the EU is a moot point. It was discussed in the 70's, due to the fact that the Canadians would love the multicultural, tri-lingual nature of Brussels and bring much to the table. But Brussels didn't want to know. The EU is built from the 18th Century designs of a European state that pre-date the rise of nationalism under Napoleon et al. It is hard enough to build a federal state on the loose foundation of pan-European identity (this is growing, particularly among the young, but is still extremely fragile.)

If one wants to get technical the E stands for European and could be taken to mean any nation which has a large population of people with a European ancestry.