Rethinking Europe: A first step towards a Europe of the regions

"The EU is now the world's largest economy." This sentence from the European election manifesto 2024-2029 by Volt highlights the economic strengths and opportunities of this smallest of the five (or six) continents in the world. On the other hand, it is not equally clear and uncontested since when Europe can be seen as a geographical unit. The definition becomes even more difficult if Europe is to be described as a socio-political unit. For then the topic of the historical and cultural diversity of this area of the world inevitably develops and can hardly be grasped conclusively, and quickly associated with it are categories of evaluation that vary between highly positive and deeply negative.

For a relatively short time – in historical terms – Europe has also been seen as an area of socio-political construction, however developing, on the way to an overall state-political structure. In my opinion, this vision can be traced back at most to the post-revolutionary period in France (1797, etc.) and can be related above all to the resistance against a Europe 'united' by the wars of Napoleon's armies. At that time, the emerging 'unifying bond' was the idea of the nation state. However, the coming together against the Napoleonic power and, later, against the aristocratic ruling families in Europe soon changed into the model of competing nation states. The competition between the leading countries around the world then took the form of colonialism and imperialism, before the catastrophe of the First World War broke out in 1914, thus irrevocably revealing to the whole world the power of industrialization and technification that Europe had unleashed.

The decades following the First World War could have served as a time to breathe a sigh of relief and reflect on how the contradictions between industrial production and human dignity, between capitalist exploitation and socially beneficial innovation, could be rethought, controlled and brought into a balance of human and ecological well-being. Instead, examples of mass oppression and coercive life planning were built up, which, under the dictate of racist and/or party-compliant ideologies, led the world into the next catastrophe. Fascism, which emerged in southern and central Europe, was confronted too hesitantly and indecisively, so that it was able to present itself as a successful political movement in the 1930s and celebrated military triumphs (Spain, Ethiopia). When Nazi Germany unleashed World War II, the Western liberal-socialist powers only managed to end this global conflagration and the Holocaust with the help of Stalinist, inhumane sacrifices of huge army units. The fact that nuclear weapons were used in the Pacific theater of war marks the two epoch-making thresholds for human history. German Nazi fascism with the Holocaust and the development and use of the atomic weapon are the dimension-exploding events in the 20th century, both of which, in their effect and significance, will continue to shape the future of humanity for a long time to come. In this respect, the opinion and the resulting belief that fascism had been overcome as a specific problem of the 20th century has proven to be a naive political short-sightedness, as can be seen everywhere. In the same way, the reduction of nuclear weapons, which had created a sense of calm for two to three decades, has once again become a political issue, with the possibility of rearmament and proliferation again on the table.

Many parts of society in the countries of Europe and the world after the double impact of the world wars – 1914-18 and 1939-45 – found themselves in a psychological and moral situation that, in addition to the almost universal need to rebuild a functioning everyday life, still left courage and hope for a fundamentally different world organization. While Bertha von Suttner's warning from 1911 had come true, "that civilization will perish in the war of the future" (Neues Frauenleben, XXIII Jahrgang Nr. 11 Dez 1911), the founding of the United Nations (1945) and the entry into force of the so-called European Coal and Steel Community in Europe (1951) important signs of a new beginning. The latter became the European Economic Community (EEC) in the Treaty of Rome (1957) with the same members, and gradually the European Union emerged from it.

However, with three enlargements in the 21st century (2004, 2007 and 2013) and one withdrawal (Brexit: referendum in June 2016, withdrawal date January 31, 2020), it has now grown into an association of 27 countries and the 'world's largest economic area' mentioned above. Its internal political disunity and thus inability to convincingly present a united front to the outside world remains serious, despite contrary efforts and endeavors, as has now been made quite clear by the 47th President of the United States' termination of the 'Atlantic community'. But the strenuous efforts to maintain the image of the economically powerful EU have long since been unable to paper over the many political cracks within this union: starting with the refugee and asylum problem, which for three decades now can only be seen as a sign of the utmost poverty for the respect of human rights in Europe, or the group of supporters of 'illiberal democracies' led by Hungary, and after the financial crisis of 2008, then the humiliation of Greece with its debt, to which even conservative newspapers like the FAZ stated "that what Europe is experiencing at the moment is not an episode, but a power struggle between the primacy of the economy and the primacy of politics." (FAZ 1.Nov. 11)

But this primacy of politics has always been put in second place in the construction of the EU. The European Parliament has only had the right to approve the EU budget since the Lisbon Treaty came into force (December 1, 2009), but it still has no right to initiate legislation on its own initiative, but can only request the Commission to submit a draft law within 12 months (!), - a truly exemplary way in which 'Europe' can be effective! And as before, Europeans cannot vote 'Europeanly', but must give their votes to national representatives; a supranational election is not provided for. Similarly, the EU's executive body, the Commission, has only very weak democratic safeguards. Section 7.4 of the Volt election program calls for the introduction of a European Senate to replace the Council of the EU, which is to be abolished, in which the respective national parliaments would send an equal number of senators. This Senate, together with the European Parliament, but also with the authority to initiate laws itself, would then have the task of passing EU laws.

In view of the desirable political federal structure of the EU and the demand for much greater transparency in decision-making and processes, point 8 of the Volt election program, 'European Democracy', calls for the creation of a democracy law in which the responsibilities within the EU apparatus are clearly regulated and the participation of citizens is made explicit. In this context, it should be emphasized that the goals of a truly political EU are historically unique: to create a new, identifiable socio-political entity from a union of states with very different nationalities and cultures. It must be clear that this project goes far beyond any historical examples; not to mention the unification of the Swiss Confederation, nor the revolt and victory of the Dutch citizens against the Spanish occupation, nor the secession of the former British territories from the English crown, with the subsequent land grab and the almost complete extermination of the former indigenous people in North America, up to the various national movements in 19th-century Europe, nowhere was there even a rudimentarily comparable, multifaceted and ambitious socio-political goal. To support this path, a type of organization for the participation of European regions in the political self-understanding of the EU is presented here, which should ultimately be established alongside the EU Parliament and the EU Senate as a third pillar for the presentation and adoption of EU laws, and thus the complex diversity of the expected political state form 'European Union' can be steered and governed with appropriate and adaptable, democratic means.

The EUROPE of the REGIONS

In the current state of the EU, the European Committee of the Regions (CoR) is a consultative body composed of European bodies.

(officially: consultative body representing regional and local authorities in Europe. The committee members are elected representatives of local or regional authorities. Each country nominates the members of its choice, who are then appointed by the Council of the EU for a five-year term. The number of members per country is based on the population of the countries.

The members of a country form the national delegation, which reflects the political, geographical, regional and local reality of their country.)

Since the committee members are appointed by their respective governments, the resulting delegation should correspond to or at least be close to the premises and political goals of their government. This is by no means undemocratic, as they are all elected representatives, but it does generally preserve the political hierarchy within a nation: the region speaks via the respective national government about European issues.

The fundamentally different view of the regions presented here refers to the fact that regions often have more in common in terms of problems, traditions and possible solutions with their direct neighbors, i.e. horizontally, than they do with more distant regions, even within their own nation. Therefore, an attempt is being made here to promote an understanding of regions that transcends national borders, since it is precisely cross-border perspectives that allow for a better understanding of the respective problems of 'the others' and for a better response to them. Existing, already defined European regions in the EU are cross-border areas that have actually been formed as exceptions and on a smaller scale, with an economic focus and no designated political function, which as such could easily be integrated into the political supranational regions.

The Europe of countries or nations is thus joined by another administrative entity, a Europe of regions that transcend national borders. The division presented is intended as an example of a possible solution. Of course, the basic ideas could also be achieved by other conceivable divisions and organizations and must in any case be worked out in detail.

Depending on the population, geographical size and location, all EU countries are regrouped into regions, with each region normally consisting of four to five nationally different parts. The regions, which in the example shown consist of only three national parts, are included in order to be able to include neighboring, potential EU candidates with their country parts. The number of three different countries is chosen here as a prerequisite for a region to be able to function. If only two countries in a region are EU members still 'waiting' to join for other nations, then this region does not yet have a functional status.

The version presented here is based on the 27 current member states. However, the regions are already drawn in such a way that, in addition to the official accession candidates, other countries in Europe would already know the regions to which the parts of their national entity would be assigned if they so wished, as possible candidates in the event of an expected accession.

The following countries are considered as potential new EU members: Serbia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Montenegro, Albania, and North Macedonia; in addition, Norway and Iceland may also be possible. Further potential EU accession countries such as Ukraine, Moldova, Turkey, Georgia, and Armenia would require a revision or reorganization of regions XXV, XXVI, and XXVII.

At the given time (2025), six regions would not be operational:

XII – Memel-Volhynia XXII – Balkans XXIII – Walachia

XXV – Black Sea XXVI – Krym-Van Gölü XXVII – Donec'k-Caucasus

Ten regions could, with currently three or four country parts, include adjacent country parts without further reorganization:

I – Scandinavia                     V – North Sea                         VI – Channel

VIII – Atlantic Ocean          XI – Centre                           XIII – Carpathians

XVII – Olives and Vine       XVIII – Mediterranean Sea W-E                                                     XIX – Adriatic Sea                XXIV – Ægean Sea

The current number of residents represented is shown in the column of the currently represented residents, and in the second column (new accession) the number of residents represented when the accession of the candidates has been completed, the figures are understandably from 2025!

The participation of small and large countries in the regions ranges from a minimum of two to a maximum of five regions: small countries are part of two transnational regions, the largest countries are part of five. The division by population is as follows:

countries with up to 5.5 million inhabitants are part of two regions

            “             from 5.5 to 19 million                    part of three regions

            “             from 19 - 36 million                       part of four regions

            “             from 36 million and more             part of five regions

In all regions, an elected Regional Circle is to formulate the interests, intentions and wishes of the region for the central Regional Conference (e.g. in Brussels) and contribute to their implementation. Each nation represented in a region has 2 secure + 3 vote-dependent seats in the Regional Circle, so this would normally have 20-25 representatives, and for regions that only consist of three nations, there would be 15 representatives. These regional representatives are elected simultaneously by the population of all three or four or five dedicated national sections of each region, crossing national borders. The candidates on the lists for the seats to be allocated in the Regional Circle are to be elected by all those entitled to vote in all the various national sections of each region.

Example: A region with four different national sections ; in national-section A there would be 15 candidates on the electoral list, 12 from national-section B, 18 from national-section C and 9 from national-section D. The top two candidates on each list would be guaranteed a place in the Regional Circle, giving a total of 8 candidates. The remaining 12 places would be distributed according to the number of votes cast for each candidate, regardless of the list. This would support a cross-national and cross-language election campaign for all candidates in a region.

Based on the current situation, 15 people would be elected in each of nine regional groups (so 135 in total), 20 people in each of ten regional groups (so 200 in total), and 25 people in each of two regional groups (so 50 in total). The central Regional Conference would therefore have 135 + 200 + 50 members, or 385 delegates from the regions. The existing Committee of the Regions (CoR) currently has 319 members.

The main focus of the election and the resulting composition of the Regional Conference, in the intended way of strengthening regional interests in the EU, should be the appointment of future EU commissioners and their deputies, with one commissioner and one deputy being proposed per region. This could put an end to the appointment of commissioners by national governments, which has been practiced to date and is widely perceived as opaque, agreed behind closed doors and ultimately undemocratic.

This would not only reduce the number of commissioners; there are currently 21 functional regions, so there are also that many commissioners. This departure from national counting in certain areas would also lead to a much more balanced representation and representation of the population in the EU. While an EU brochure points out the diversity of the size of the states with a not entirely understandable pride, e.g. the population of Malta is 1/205th of that of the Federal Republic of Germany, while in the Europe of the Regions presented here, the ratio of inhabitants between the smallest 'Region II – Bothnian Gulf' and the most populous 'Region XIV – Alps' is 1/6.5.

In addition to the EU Parliament, the EU Senate reformed from the Council of the EU and now the EU Conference, as the democratic home of the Commission, the latter is to become the third pillar in the building of the EU's legislative initiators and controllers. The procedures for adopting legislation between these three must be explained in an additional text; in any case, the 'informal trilogue' that is already frequently used in the EU will continue to be used and expanded in a practice-oriented manner after the Treaty of Amsterdam (1999).

Regions of Europe (March 2025)                                                  © Volker Thurm-Nemeth

Volker Thurm-Nemeth (born 1944 in Weiden/Oberpfalz) studied architecture at the TU Karlsruhe and TU Berlin, graduating in 1974 under Hermann Fehling. He has lived in Vienna since 1975 and has worked here with a number of architects (O. Uhl, H. Hollein, H. Czech, A. Krischanitz, E. Prohaska, and others). 1977-78 at the University of Manchester (UK) M.A. in Urban Design. From 1979-80 he was involved in the development of self-build modules for the Wilaya Annaba (Algeria). From 1985 to 1987 he worked at the URBACO (urban planning) office in Constantine (Algeria). He is married to Elisabeth Nemeth and together they have two sons. He has had his own office in Mödling and Vienna since 1987. His interests lie in architecture and art history as well as international development.

Publications: Transparent Nr. 1/1976 – Visionarium; Transparent Nr. 3.4/1981 – Architektur + Stadtbau in Algerien; Falter Nr. 16/1983 – R. Buckminster Fuller;  Konstruktion zwischen Werkbund und Bauhaus (Verlag hpt Wien 1998);  Wien und der Wiener Kreis-Ein Begleitbuch (WUV Wien 2003).