For some months now, the coronavirus has been a priority because of how it is affecting European Union (EU) countries beyond the social alarm that has been created. It is a threat that has become a reality sooner rather than later. From China, where the pandemic outbreak began, we were alerted to the serious impact that the arrival of the outbreak in the EU could have because of its disastrous effects. The Member States (MS) and the European institutions saw it as a fallacy that would not come to fruition, but which in the end has established itself, causing a serious health and economic crisis. The great lack of transparency has even cast doubt on the real extent of the pandemic, since the governments of the Member States and the EU have shielded themselves from the perceived, and it is clear and evident that the damage actually being suffered is not known for certain.
The first manifestations as soon as the number of contagions began to grow was the confinement of the population, a rapid measure that sought to contain the spread of the virus and thus curb the number of infected people due to the health collapse that was looming in most of the Member States. It was followed by the closure of Schengen borders, a wise and swift decision to prevent flows of people but not of goods (although it should be noted that the borders will hardly ever be the same as before for practical purposes). Although criticised, these measures have put the brakes on the spread of the disease, as although it will not be possible to eradicate it (in whole or in part) until a vaccine is available, they have allowed a positive development as opposed to containment.
Apart from these actions, the European institutions did not act in the same way. The lack of a joint response highlighted the lack of cohesion between the Member States and the institutions, showing the erosion that exists between them.. The silence of the European Commission is most notable, only participating in the joint meetings and Von der Leyen explaining the meagre progress made. His speech of "coordination of a common response"This is completely false, as joint measures and protocols, both health and economic, should have been put in place from the beginning in order to mitigate the effects as far as possible. The EU is guilty of using the verb needwhen the one to use is make. One only has to look at how Member States have had to purchase all sanitary equipment individually, with high prices and slow delivery for the existing needs. The arrival of systems such as rescEU or the Coronavirus Global Response has been too late.
At times like these, the fundamental principles of the EU, those that brought us together in the first place, should be brought to the fore in order to be able to jointly face this crisis that is going to sink Europe. But all this has come too late: the north-south divide has intensified, the lack of solidarity is latent, tensions have been fortified and the competition to see who has the fewest infections and deaths has begun.. All of this must be seen as a strategy by the Member States to seek prominence, in which the EU has no presence whatsoever. Some say that this crisis will consolidate the European pillars and foundations, but nothing could be further from the truth: it will destroy them. Each Member State will look after its own citizens and interests, as has been seen in the case of European bailout funds and the crown badgesamong others. Do not be surprised to see more than one country deciding to leave the EU following the British lead..
That is why if the EU cannot coordinate its own members, how can it be a relevant actor in the international security arena. It is impossible. Not enough relevance was given when the outbreak started, and on the way to its end the same thing is evident: that the EU is not a relevant actor in the international security arena. the EU is not ready and the Member States are in an "every man for himself" race.. The lack of foresight outside the economic spheres will mean that we will never be an international actor in security, or in any other area. Our lack of unity with examples such as the migration crisis of 2015 and our own tensions have already caused the common project to begin to take on water, but now the dam is going to burst.
If these tensions and confrontations continue at this rate, this project, much more mercantile than social, but which has brought so many positive aspects and progress, will come to an end sooner rather than later. A clear example is Spain: without the EU, the position we are in right now would be a completely unrealistic wish. However, it is not all negative, we can see how the Member States have helped each other at this time by sending material and medical personnel. We could have contained the pandemic, but our own bureaucracy did not allow us to do so.
As cliché as it may sound, the solution, beyond pooling all Member States' policies and European resources on issues such as COVID-19 and the cessation of infections and deaths, is to give new strength to the idea of the United States of Europe and give value to a common solidarity that includes human value and retaliates against national paternalism in order to coordinate ourselves and see what we are capable of achieving under one roof. If this is strengthened, the EU can rise from its own ashes, as these confrontations, grudges and "tug-of-war" between the Member States themselves and the EU will end very badly. Extrapolating a quote from Confucius, with nuances, it warns us of what happens in situations of mutual destruction such as the one that is being carried out between them and towards the EU: "before embarking on a journey of revenge, dig two graves". If the EU dies, we all fall.
Fernando Pérez-Montero
Consultant junior of PROA Communication