In the EU there was long a »permissive consensus« to discretely push forward the political integration of the EU bureaucracy and national departmental bureaucracies. In this way a high level of communitization was achieved in different policy areas. This includes the far-reaching transfer of national sovereign rights to EU level, as well as the participation of national actors from the member states in policy formulation in Community institutions. Precisely because in most countries the integration process is only a marginal topic in the public debate it could be swiftly carried forward despite the comparative lack of democratic legitimacy. Since the entry of 10 new states in 2004, however, and particularly since the ratification process of the constitutional treaty came to a standstill, more and more aspects of the deepening of integration and the extension of the institutional structure have become the object of controversial social and political debates within and between individual countries.

In this issue of INTERNATIONAL POLITICS AND SOCIETY academics and politicians identify the central challenges confronting the EU at the beginning of the German Council presidency, and work out political solutions and needs. At the center of the contribution written by European parliamentarian Udo Bullmann and Jan Kunz is the Lisbon Strategy, by means of which the EU was to become – originally by 2010 – the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economic area in the world. But the interim goals agreed upon were never achieved. Now a new attempt to reach the Lisbon Goals is being made with a reformed Stability and Growth Pact and an integrated package of directives in the area of economic and employment policy, which goes beyond the previous deregulatory approaches.

In the development of future-oriented economic and social policies Bullmann and Kunz call for a stronger orientation towards the modernization successes of the Nordic countries, which are based on massive investment in education, research and development rather than on liberalization, wage cuts and the reduction of workers’ rights. Michael Dauderstädt also emphasizes that the well-known strategies of cost reduction and lowering incomes are not the right approach, since they do nothing to tackle the EU ’s notoriously poor growth. What is really needed is productivity increases by means of stronger specialization, as well as state investment in research and training and education. At the same time, a wages and incomes policy which is compatible with stimulating productivity is also required, linked to redistribution measures for the benefit of low-income groups.

Andreas Maurer shows how difficult it is to move ahead with routine business in the complex institutional architecture of the EU, and at the same time to bring new policy points to the fore or launch new initiatives. On the example of the conflict concerning the European Constitutional Treaty he explores what ways are open to the Council presidency to rescue the substance of the Treaty. If one understands by substance the innovations in the Treaty text in comparison with the current treaties, the option with the best prospect of success would be the amendment or abridgement of the Treaty and not the renegotiation of the whole package. The existing options must be clearly assessed in the first six months of 2007 if action strategies are to be derived for the period of the Portuguese and Slovenian presidencies.

In comparison with the constitutional question European domestic policy is rather a technical policy field. But the formation of a single area of freedom, security and law, as laid down in the European treaties, is of greater significance for the democratic legitimation of the project as a whole. Actually European justice and domestic policy is first and foremost security oriented. In the debate on the measures currently envisaged to combat terrorism and control migration the question of their compatibility with fundamental rights and proportionality is rather neglected. Daniela Kietz and Roderick Parkes call for the opening up of the European legislative process hitherto dominated by actors from ministries of the interior, the police and criminal justice and for the participation of actors who can hold the process to account from the Parliament, the judiciary, the data protection authorities and non-government organizations as a prerequisite of a balanced domestic and judicial policy.

The foreign policy of the EU countries continues to show a low level of communitization. If Europe really wishes to play its envisaged active role in the formation of the world order European interests must be defined and a common view on global issues must be developed. Dirk Messner warns that Europe could be marginalized in the transition from a US-dominated western world order to a multipolar power constellation, with China and India as new world powers. But this transformation process also offers opportunities for Europe to play a leading role. As champion and catalyst of a fair and effective multilateralism the EU could play an important role as long as it understands the need to enter into alliances with rising powers and to develop strategic partnerships.

Complementing the issue’s main focus Heinz Timmermann analyses the prospects for German–Russian relations; Alex Grigor’ev and Adrian Severin make suggestions for a lasting peace in Kosovo; and Michael Ehrke analyses the causes of unrest in Hungary in autumn 2006.