European integration and asymmetric power: dynamics and change in the EMU

ABSTRACT

In the almost 27 years since the signing of the Treaty of Maastricht (ToM), the EMU has transformed into a complex institution, the complexity and powers of which have exceeded even the most promising predictions. Over the years, EU actors have developed a substantial dependent relationship, where asymmetric power plays a crucial role; in fact, asymmetry and asymmetric power have become the unifying glue for economic integration. The main purpose of this study is to analyze and evaluate the importance of asymmetric power in order to understand dynamics and change in the EMU and to determine through which mechanism the economic integration process has been asymmetrically promoted. As we will argue, within the EMU, there seems to exist a specific feedback loop mechanism, through which the dominance of powerful MS is reproduced in the way policy is proposed within contemporary EMU politics. The reproduction of asymmetric power within the EMU plays a key role in shaping the system of governance and in decision-making, and through economic integration, appropriate dynamics have been created to diffuse and reproduce asymmetric power.

KEYWORDS:

• Asymmetry
• power
• European integration
• EMU
• crisis
• eurozone

Acknowledgement

We would like to show our gratitude to Kalypso Nicolaïdis, Professor of International Relations and director of the Centre for International Studies at the University of Oxford, for her comments on an earlier version of the manuscript. We also thank two “anonymous” reviewers for their so-called insights.

Notes

1 For example, a debtor MS can also influence the EMU framework significantly. See Brunnermeier et al. (2016, p. 3).

2 This assumption about the differentiation between creditors and debtors’ states refers only to EMU politics.

3 See, for example, 2016 European Commission’s report for Italy regarding the macroeconomic imbalances. https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/cr_italy_2016_en.pdf

4 The main arguments of the feedback loop mechanism have been analyzed in Maris and Sklias (2016a, 2016b) and Maris (2017, 2020).

5 Recently, new research regarding the issue of sovereignty in the EU has come to the fore (see Brack, Coman, & Crespy, 2019).

6 See, for example, Krotz and Schild (2013, p. 194).

7 The most powerful MS were significantly exposed to Greece (France ($54 billion), Germany ($36 billion), Italy ($26 billion), Belgium ($19 billion), the Netherlands ($20 billion), Luxembourg ($20 billion), Great Britain ($12 billion), and Austria ($ 8 billion)) (The New York Times 2010).