I think there is no pure economic explanation for most things European (or American, for that matter). There may also be a rather larger difference between the "average European" and the "average European leader" with respect to EU power vs national sovereignty. Certainly the UK is an active voice against loss of excessive soveriegnty.
The economic history of the EU includes the early beginnings with coal & steel agreements, and the beginnings of a European Free Trade Zone. However, the economic competition with the US, which Europe keeps losing (and is doomed to lose to a greater extent in the future), has their leaders looking for a magic bullet of economic success. The Maastricht treaty of Monetary & Economic Union was seen by most of Europe as a way to spread Germany's monetary stability and strong economy to the rest of Europe. The benefits: more internal trade, more stable money, much easier internal travel. But Germany wouldn't accept a common Euro without the Stability and Growth Pact, which stipulated maximum budgetary deficits and a maximum gross gov't debt. The enforcement of such a pact, when push comes to shove, includes some loss of sovereignty. "Like all treaties", only more so. And, as Germany & France & Italy are all on the wrong side of the Pact, pushing and shoving is starting. Brief by Tom Grey (from Slovakia, one of the candidate countrieshoping to join the EU, and NATO, as soon as possible, and get more foreign investment, and move up soon from an average wage of $300/month and some 16% unemployment) -----Original Message----- From: fabio guillermo rojas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 3:26 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: European Soveriegnty Is there an economic explanation of why Europeans seem to want to give up soveriegnty to the EU or the UN? Fabio
