However, in many ways, the EU fell short of being a true union. For one thing, a number of states secured ‘opt-outs’ of aspects of the EU which they opposed. For example, Denmark chose not to participate in foreign policy decision-making that had defence implications and the United Kingdom opted out of the Social Chapter. Denmark, Sweden and the United Kingdom have all opted out of EMU. This development has led to debates about whether there should be differentiated integration or enhanced forms of co-operation in the EU.
The EU is structured as three pillars: the European Community, Common Foreign and Security Policy and Justice and Home Affairs, now Police and Judicial Co-operation in Criminal Matters. EU decision-making is conducted on a different basis, depending on whether policy falls under the supranational first pillar or the intergovernmental second and third pillars. In some policy areas of the first pillar (e.g. taxation) states protect their right to veto proposals and in intergovernmental areas it has been notoriously difficult for the EU to speak with a single voice on foreign policy and defence issues.
The enlargement of the EU to 25 member states on 1 May 2004 could make the aim of creating a coherent union more difficult. While the accession states were obliged to adopt the acquis communautaire in its entirety and were permitted no opt-outs, there are concerns that they might exercise their veto rights in the Council of the European Union to make their voices heard and bargain for concessions.
The EU has been reformed and consolidated by the Treaty of Amsterdam and the Treaty of Nice. The decision to convene the European Convention to draft a Constitutional Treaty for the EU was a further step in the process of forming a coherent union.
This is the complete article, containing 367 words
(approx. 1 page at 300 words per page).
