Wiki (potential superpowers) said:The European Union (EU) has been called an emerging superpower by academics.[9][32] Many scholars and academics like T.R. Reid,[33] Andrew Reding,[34] Andrew Moravcsik,[35] Mark Leonard,[36] Jeremy Rifkin,[37] John McCormick,[38] and some politicians like Romano Prodi[39] and Tony Blair[40][41] either believe that the EU is, or will become, a superpower in the 21st century.
Mark Leonard cites several factors: the EU's large population, large economy (the EU has the largest economy in the world; the economy of the EU is slightly larger than that of the U.S. in terms of GDP purchasing (PPP) [42]), low inflation rates, the unpopularity and perceived failure of US foreign policy in recent years, and certain EU members states' high quality of life (when measured in terms such as hours worked per week, health care, social services).[43]
John McCormick believes that the EU has already achieved superpower status, based on the size and global reach of its economy and on its global political influence. He argues that the nature of power has changed since the Cold War-driven definition of superpower was developed, and that military power is no longer essential to great power; he argues that control of the means of production is more important than control of the means of destruction, and contrasts the threatening hard power of the United States with the opportunities offered by the soft power wielded by the European Union.[44]
Parag Khanna believes that the EU, together with China, has already achieved superpower status and rivals the US for influence around the world.[45][46] He also mentions the large economy of the EU, that European technologies more and more set the global standards and that European countries give the most development assistance. He agrees with McCormick that the EU does not need a common army to be a superpower. The EU uses intelligence and the police to apprehend radical Islamists, social policy to try to integrate restive Muslim populations and economic strength to incorporate the former Soviet Union and gradually subdue Russia.[45] Khanna also writes that South America, East Asia, and other regions prefer to emulate the "European Dream" than the American variant.[47] This could possibly be seen in the South American Union and the African Union. Notably, the EU as a whole is among the most culturally diverse "entities" on the planet,[48] with some of the world's largest and most influential languages being official within its borders.[49]
Andrew Reding also takes the future EU enlargement into account. An eventual future accession of the rest of Europe would not only boost the economy of the EU, but it would also increase the EU's population to a level almost equal to that of India and China. The EU is qualitatively different from India and China since it is enormously more prosperous and technologically advanced.[34] Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan told the Journal of Turkish Weekly in 2005 that: "In 10 or 15 years, the EU will be a place where civilizations meet. It will be a superpower with the inclusion of Turkey." [50]
Robert J. Guttman remarks that the very definition of the term superpower has changed and that in the new 21st century, it does not only refer to states with military power, but also to groups such as the European Union, which has strong market economics, young, highly educated workers who are savvy in high technology, and a global vision.[51] Friis Arne Petersen, the Danish ambassador to the U.S. has expressed similar views. He conceded that the EU is a “special kind of superpower,” one that has yet to establish a unified military force that exerts itself even close to the same level as many of its individual members.[52]
Additionally, it is argued by commentators that full political integration is not required for the European Union to wield international influence: that its apparent weaknesses constitute its real strengths (as of its low profile diplomacy and the emphasis on the rule of law)[44] and that the EU represents a new and potentially more successful type of international actor than traditional ones;[53] however, it is uncertain if the effectiveness of such an influence would be equal to that of a politically integrated superpower such as the United States.[54]
Barry Buzan notes that the EU's potential superpower status depends on its "stateness". It is unclear though how much state-like quality is needed for the EU to be described as a superpower. Buzan states that the EU is likely to remain a potential superpower for a long time because although it has material wealth, its "political weakness and its erratic and difficult course of internal political development, particularly as regards a common foreign and defence policy" constrains it from being a superpower.[26]
Alexander Stubb, the Finnish Minister for Foreign Affairs, has said that he thinks the EU is both a superpower and not a superpower. While the EU is a superpower in the sense that it is the largest political union, single market and aid donor in the world, it is not a superpower in the defense or foreign policy spheres. Like Barry Buzan, Alexander Stubb thinks that the most major factor constraining the EU’s rise to superpower status is its lack of statehood in the international system, other factors are its lack of internal drive to project power worldwide, and continued preference for the sovereign nation-state amongst some Europeans. To counter-balance these he urged the EU leaders to approve and ratify the Lisbon Treaty (which they did in 2009), create an EU foreign ministry (EEAS, led by High Representative Catherine Ashton, will be finished in 2012), develop a common EU defense, hold one collective seat at the UN Security Council and G8, and address what he described as the “sour mood” toward the EU prevalent in some European countries today.[55]
However, some politicians and writers do not believe that the EU will achieve superpower status. "The EU is not and never will be a superpower" according to the former UK Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs David Miliband.[56] Lacking a unified foreign policy and with an inability to project military power worldwide, the EU lacks "the substance of superpowers," who by definition have "first of all military reach [and] possess the capacity to arrive quickly anywhere with troops that can impose their government's will.".[57] EU parliamentarian Ilka Schroeder argues that conflicts such as the Israeli-Palestinian dispute see close EU involvement largely to compensate for European inability to project military power internationally.[58]
The Economist's Robert Lane Greene notes that the lack of a strong European military only exacerbates the lack of unified EU foreign policy and discounts any EU arguments towards superpower status, noting especially that the EU's creation of a global response force rivaling the superpower's (America) is "unthinkable."[59] The biggest barrier to European superpowerdom is that European elites refuse to bring their postmodern fantasies about the illegitimacy of military "hard power" into line with the way the rest of the world interprets reality" according to Soren Kern of Strategic Studies Group.[60] Britain's Michael Howard has warned against the "worry" that many Europeans are pushing for greater EU integration to counter-balance the United States,[61] while Europe's total reliance on soft (non-military) power is in part because of its lack of a "shared identity." [62] While to some the European Union should be a "model power" unafraid of using military force and backing free trade, its military shortcomings argue against superpower status.[63]
Does EU have what it takes to be a superpower?
And should in your opinion the EU work towads becoming more unified (politicaly) or perhaps at some point in the future even merge into one country (to easier compete with other big economyes - USA, China, Japan, ...)?
