Europe must find new momentum. The world has changed, is no longer as complementary or cooperative, and Europe must adopt a common dynamic to address this.
The constituent countries of Europe have only a recent shared history, even though the histories of European countries have been intertwined over the centuries. Cultures are not similar, languages are distinct, and institutions may resemble each other, but significant differences remain even after almost 70 years since the signing of the Treaty of Rome. It is to define the framework that will coherently unite the peoples of Europe that we, collectively, need a narrative. Europe is a particular construct, and it must define a specific domain for itself.
The first question to ask is that of the institutional framework. To resolve economic, political, and cultural issues, would it be preferable to define a more centralized field in order to give coherence to the European agenda, or to opt more for polycentrism?
Centralization could resemble a form of federal state. This idea, which mimics what is observed in the United States, allows the center to create impulses and, a priori, to influence behavior more quickly. France has often invoked this institutional framework to give the centralized state the ability to steer the short-term economic cycle through fiscal policy.
The other option is a form of polycentrism, in which different countries can contribute along a looser framework. This vision is the one that, since the Enlightenment, has fostered the emergence of ideas and controversies that led to the Industrial Revolution, thus placing Europe at the heart of global development. Joël Mokyr, in particular, shows that it was the diversity of a society open to the world that gave Europe an advantage over centralized and less adaptable China.
A major dimension common to both approaches is that of openness to the world, since European growth has become highly dependent on non-European workers since the pandemic. This is what I mentioned here.
Another line of thought needs to be explored. Among the themes discussed—economic, political, and cultural—which should be part of a common framework and which can be more local? Or what is debatable and what is not? It’s conceivable that the economy could have a more global status due to the necessary catching up highlighted by the Draghi and Letta reports. The cultural dimension could be more local, as is already the case with societal issues.
The narrative matrix has two columns (centralized, polycentric) and two rows (global, local). This articulation will be the key to the autonomy Europe needs from the rest of the world. It is up to all of us to contribute to its construction.