"Risse, Thomas (2010): A Community of Europeans? Transnational Identities and Public Spheres
The book ‘ A community of Europeans? Transitional identities and public spheres is piece that explains the relationship among the countries in Europe. In providing a review on this book the paper will focus on the argument of the author on the relationship in this zone. The paper will also provide an analysis on how effective the argument of the author is in creating this particular book. In the review the author’s claims will be put in to the real situation perspective where the truth behind his arguments will be established. With matters in the book touching on the euro zone, an analysis of the situation in the zone will be provided from which Risse’s work will be compared to. In the book the author focuses mostly on Poland, Germany and England from which he bases most of his comparisons. Is the rest of Europe like the three countries? Are there countries in Europe that are unfairly categorized by Risse’s claims? How accurate is it to base the relationship across Europe by the claims by Risse? These are the main questions that may results from this review paper. The paper will also provide answers on these questions.
The book by Risse is set to provide an analysis on the public sphere that surround the Euro zone. The public spheres are sociological, economical, psychological and geological. From the book Europe is put into a historical perspective when it was a public spheres superpower. The relationship between Europeans nations was great and strong. The bond the zone shared could not be challenged by any shortcoming (Risse, 2010). The relationship was stronger than the bond they shared in economic spheres. According to Barzel & Risse (2012) the relationship the euro zone enjoyed was also responsible for the financial stability the zone had. The author further argues that once a zone shares public spheres that are surrounded with strong bonds and relationships it is an obvious assumption that the success in the zone’s economic activity will increase significantly. Century’s back the relationship in Europe was challenged the world wars after which countries made temporary friends and enemies. After this period the euro zone managed to create one common public sphere that each and every nation in the zone had faith in. the zone was made even greater by the geological bonds neighboring nations shared. Additionally, one common market made the bonds even stronger. At the time many nations across the globe had the urge and urgency to create financial stable zones and partners. With only the United States having a stable economic and social environment, Europe had only its nations to establish strong bonds with. In an argument by Risse (2010) nations in Europe realized that the only way in which they could be safe in the global sphere is by creating bonds between themselves. The same sentiments are also shared by Risse (2010) who argues that the euro zone was the only option the euro zone had in creating a healthy social, economic and psychological relationship with.
It is from these advancements that the European Union was formed. In the first chapter in this book by Risse the significance of the European is sensitized as the main reason as to why Europe enjoys the stability it has today. The European Union is termed the best tool that Europe will ever have in its quest for global supremacy. The European Unions also increased the level at which public spheres were created. It is an obvious fact that the European Unions increased the effectiveness of the Euro zone. The union provided its member nation with resources in all areas: from economic resources, to social resources and the promotion of the vast culture in Europe. In an argument by Risse (2010) the union became the complete unifying factor that enabled the zone to be in such good form. With time the union became the backbone of Europe. Every decision regardless of the scope was passed in regards to the union. In Risse’s argument is that the union provided one common ground on which nations across Europe would operate on. However, was this enough to bridge the small gaps across the continent? Was the union enough to create equality across the continent? Was the union able to make the smaller nations feel represented across the continent? Was the union enough to create strong and durable public sphere? The above question raised by Risse showed how far the continent was far in achieving complete unity. Risse argued that even with the union in place the continent was far from being completely unified. However, this notion could be argued against as the union created a far better relationship among the nations in Europe. There was great difference in Europe before and after the establishment of the European Union. For instance, trade in Europe was greatly increased by the establishment of the European Union. Before its establishment exports were heavily taxed especially for smaller nations like Poland. This greatly hindered the growth of such nations as the market was controlled by mighty nations like Germany and Great Britain.
In the book by the Risse this difference is not highlighted as he argued that even after the establishment of the European Union mighty nations like Germany and England continued to run affairs in the euro zone. In an argument by Borzel & Risse (2012) this fact may be true but the impact of the European Union should not be undermined in terms of creating equality among its member states. The author further argues that the relationship between the union and nations in Europe was based on benefits only. These sentiments are shared by Risse who argues that member states only focused on what they could gain from the union but did give a lot of concern in mending the relationship among each other. This fact created a timeline on which nation could continue enjoying strong bonds. The falling part was predictable and very obvious as the rift between the north and south became conspicuous.
In the review by Risse, he highlighted the fact that the political, cultural and social differences in the region became more significant than the bond the region shared. In his argument he argues that the only way that Europe was to have a lasting union was to set aside these differences which they valued very much. However, this was not to be as many countries after gaining stability became more attached to what they believed in. it was true to argues that nations in Europe only had benefits I mind when creating bonds in the European union. This is because as soon as nations became more independent and stable that the differences began to show. This led the continent from one common community to various communities who had nothing in common. This advances destroyed the public spheres that were created in the region. The most significant rifts were based on political grounds. The political scope in the region became divided as ever. In creating an analysis of this situation, Risse did not highlight the fact leadership and the greed to power influenced the rifts under the political ground. It is an undeniable fact that both the north and the south parts of Europe wanted the control of the euro zone.
Risse highlighted the fact that the north nations were not contended with the leadership style in the union and they had opted out of the union. However, this was not to be because of the benefits of the European Union. As much as the two factors remained under the same union, the differences between them grew greater by the day. In his book Risse used Poland, Germany and the United Kingdom to display his intent and arguments. However, other nations across the continent were greatly involved in the issues across the Europe.
In defense on the euro zone Risse pointed out the fact that Europe continued to grow economically even with many issue in its member states. Its economic stability was attributed to the fact that the zone has the thirst to gain complete financial dependency. Nations were also eager to create a firm economic base. Risse also pointed out the fact that the European Union was now transformed to a more of an economic body. This made the union remain significant in the region. According to Risse, Amichai & Michael (2009) the union ensured that regardless of the differences the nations had the financial situation in the region remained stable.
In regards to the public spheres in the euro zone, there was not much to show. Political, social and cultural differences became more and more significant especially in the northern nations. Risse viewed this rift as an obvious rift that could be predictable. However, he does not provide a solution that could have stopped the rift from widening. Also in Risse’s analysis using only Poland, Germany and the United Kingdom to base his arguments made the situation look more ugly and urgent. This is because the three nations held so much value in their values on political, social and cultural areas. In this argument nation like Poland were faced with much difficulty to grow due to their low influence on the factors in the continent. Germany and the United Kingdom were viewed as super powers and had greater influence even on the European Union. This made it easier for such nations to gain favor from the union. This fact was regardless of their political, cultural and social beliefs and values. It was these occurrences that destroyed the public spheres in Europe. Smaller countries like Poland felt they were being left out of the beneficiary circle. This created the rift between most north nations and the south nations which were said to have greater influence on the union.
The book by Risse highlighted much on the euro zone and its quest to have strong and durable public spheres. However, the differences created by the political, social and cultural scopes were more influential than any other factor. This made nations in the region more attached to themselves than to other nations. The facts put across by Risse had so much significance and truth that were easy to relate to. His claims were based on facts and results that are visible and real. The consequences highlighted by Risse can also be seen in the modern day analysis of the euro zone. For example, the harsh economic condition in Europe has only affected few nations severely while other countries to prosper. Smaller nations severely affected are Greece and Spain which almost went bankrupt. These occurrences were attributed to the political differences in these particular countries. These results were vaguely highlighted by Risse. However, in his predication he did not provide sufficient evidence on how well these occurrences can be prevented or what measures to be taken if they occur. With these provisions his book would have provided the whole package on how well Europe could safe guard its public spheres.
As much as Risse used mostly countries like Poland, Germany and the United Kingdom, these examples were a perfect generalization of the situation in the region. According to Borzel & Risse (2012) Germany and Poland are good examples of what was the situation in Europe. The two nations had a great rift that could not be mended by the European Union. In this rift the two nations had deep differences in their political cultural and social values. However, political values had the most significance in this particular case. This example was good enough to make a reader understand how far Europe is to create good public spheres among its member states. In the analysis by Risse a reader also understands the consequences of lacking a public sphere in a region. Analysts have argued that if there was a healthy public sphere that incorporated political, social and cultural scopes, then the differences and rifts in the euro zone could not have been experienced. The book by Risse is evidence to these claims and the consequences of lacking such spheres.
References
Börzel, T. and Risse, T. (2012) From Europeanization to Diffusion. Special Issue of West European Politics, Vol. 35, No. 1
Risse, T. (2010). A Community of Europeans. Transnational Identities and Public Spheres (Ithaca NY: Cornell University Press)
Risse, T., Amichai M. and Michael M. (2009). Promoting Democracy and the Rule of Law. American and European Strategies. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan)
