The point of departure of most discussions on European identity is the idea that a political community needs a common set of values and references to ensure its coherence, to guide its actions and to endow them with legitimacy and meaningfulness. 

With the fall of Communism in Eastern Europe in 1989 and the founding of the “European Union” in 1992 with the Maastricht Treaty, endowing the European Community with new and stronger competences in a wide range of areas (e. g. in the field of foreign affairs, security and defence), two questions gained renewed urgency: the definition of EU borders and that of the political legitimacy of the Union in the eyes of its citizens - the ‘glue’ that unites all Europeans and keeps the Community together. 

So far, the identity of the European Union has predominantly been defined politically. According to the Treaties, the EU is founded "on the principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law" (Article 6 TEU). If there is a risk of a serious breach of these principles by a member state, some of its membership rights can be suspended (see also EurActiv, 13 January 2006). In accordance with the principle "unity in diversity", it shall promote the diversity of its cultures, while "bringing the common cultural heritage to the fore" (Article 151 TEC). 

Furthermore, the EU must respect fundamental rights, as guaranteed by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the Union  would further strengthen protection, if the EU Constitutional Treaty were ratified.

As regards the accession of new members, any “European state” can apply for membership, while “Europe” and its borders are left undefined (Article 49, TEU).  In addition, it must have stable and democratic institutions, a functioning market economy and adequate administrative structures ('Copenhagen criteria'). 

However, some politicians and observers argue that the EU needs a stronger identity to be viable. Fundamental disagreements were brought to light during the work on the EU Constitutional Treaty (agreed upon in December 2004) that sparked heated debates about a reference to 'God' or 'Christianity' in the Preamble, which now refers to the 'religious inheritance'  of Europe.

The prospect of a possible EU membership of Turkey as well as issues relating to globalisation and immigration have further added to the identity debates. 

Issues:

Relatively low political participation and weak attachment pose a legitimacy problem to the EU. However, there is little agreement on how identification can be strengthened. In the following, different models are put forward.   

Europe of culture or "family of nations"

Communitarians believe that a polity can only be stable if anchored in a common history and culture. They emphasise that European identity has emerged from common movements in religion and philosophy, politics, science and the arts. Therefore, they tend to exclude Turkey from the ranks of possible future member states and argue a stronger awareness of the Christian (or Judeo-Christian) tradition. “United in diversity” is taken to refer to Europe as a “family of nations”. On this basis, it is high time to define EU borders.

Main problems: Opponents argue that this view is a form of “Euro-nationalism” that leads to exclusionary policies within European societies (as regards non-European immigrants) and the polarisation of global politics, with the “clash of civilisations” prophesied by the scholar Samuel P. Huntington as its worst possible outcome.

Europe of citizens or "constitutional patriotism" 

Liberals and republicans, on the other hand, argue for a common political culture, or civic identity, based on universal principles of democracy, human rights, the rule of law etc. expressed in the framework of a common public sphere and political participation (or “constitutional patriotism”, a term coined by the German scholar Jürgen Habermas). They believe that cultural identities, religious beliefs etc. should be confined to the private sphere. For them, European identity will emerge from common political and civic practices, civil society organisations and strong EU institutions. “United in diversity”, according to this view, means that the citizens share the same political and civic values, while at the same time adhering to different cultural practices. The limits of the community should be a question of politics, not culture.

Main problems: The liberal-republican stance is often criticised for what is seen as the artificial distinction between the private and the public, the subjective and the universal. Democracy and human rights, according to critics, are not universal values, but spring themselves from specific cultural traditions. Problems related to cultural differences are ignored, rather than dealt with. Furthermore, solidarity and emotional bonds in societies can only result from cultural feelings of belonging together, never from purely abstract principles. 

Europe as space of encounters

Constructivists believe that a “European identity” could emerge as a consequence of intensified civic, political and cultural exchanges and cooperation. As identities undergo constant change, “European identity” would be encompassing multiple meanings and identifications and would be constantly redefined through relationships with others. “United in Diversity” would mean the participation in collective political and cultural practices. It would be wrong and impossible to fix EU borders.  

Main problems: This view, according to critics, overemphasises the ability of people to adapt to a world in flux und underestimates their need for stability. Too much diversity can eventually lead to the loss of identity, orientation and coherence, and therefore undermine democracy and established communities.

However, despite fundamental differences there are a number of factors that are seen by most as preconditions for the emergence of a European identity:

• politics: the strengthening of democratic participation at all levels and more democracy at EU level
  


• education and culture: strengthening of the European dimension in certain subjects (especially history), more focus on language learning, more exchanges etc. 
  


• social and economic cohesion: counteracting social and economic differences

Positions:

According to the Commission of the Bishops’ Conferences of the European Community (COMECE), explicit references to God or Christianity “would have been a strong signal supporting the identity of Europe”. Universal rights and values, such as democracy and the rule of law, have developed from the Christian inheritance of Europe. 

In the same vein, the European People’s Party (EPP)  believes that Europe has managed to preserve a shared cultural heritage. The sense of belonging together can only be based on common cultural values and convictions. On this basis, it is high time to define EU borders.

By contrast, the liberal ALDE Group in the European Parliament promotes the idea of the EU as political community, “based not on religion or faith, but on mutual respect for common democratic and fundamental values.” The EU membership prospect of Turkey and the fact that there are millions of Muslims already living in the EU should push forward this process, not least to avoid a ‘clash of civilisations’. 

In spring 2002 a EU Reflection Group, including prominent scholars and politicians, concluded that Europe and its values could not be “firmly defined and delimited”. Its borders were necessarily open. Therefore, “the question of European identity will be answered in part by immigration laws, and in part by the negotiated accession terms of new members”.

In his report Building a Political Europe (2004) Dominique Strauss-Kahn, former French Socialist finance minister, stated: "Its project has broken down: to the questions of knowing why Europe and where Europe is going, nobody today can give a satisfactory reply. Its territory is uncertain: for the first time, the Union really poses the question of its ultimate frontiers". The uncertainties surrounding the European project, according to Strauss-Kahn, result in a legitimacy crisis and lack of popular identification.

Among the two EU countries that have been most vocal in the debates on the reference to 'God' and Christianity in the EU Constitution are Poland and France. 

The Polish ruling Law and Justice Party in its political programme of 2005 expressed its satisfaction about the failure of the Constitutional Treaty, because “it negated the role of Christianity in shaping the moral and cultural face of our continent [….], it introduced a specific anti-Christian censure to the European constitutional practice”. 

France, on the other hand, has been one of the staunchest defenders of a secular conception of the European project. Michel Barnier, French Foreign Minister 2004-2005, echoed the view of most French politicians when he said that the EU had to remain a secular construction respective of its different traditions and religions.

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan underlined that by accepting Turkey as a member, the EU would prove that it “is not really a Christian club, but a place where civilizations meet”.