>I don't think it was presented that way originally. I recall reading and then later discussions here on the UT (or I think it was here on the UT) that the goal of the EU was to eventually become a world power equal to the U.S. politically, economically, and militarily. There were arguments that no, it was only economic and nothing else otherwise no country would agree to join. Not that it would be a bad thing necessarily, but it would have the potential of being a bad thing and not just for us but for the citizens of each of the member countries. No more autonomy when that all comes to pass. What then happens with the UN? Do we have the UN, the EU, NATO, et al...?

I think it all started when WWII ended. There was this big plan of visionaries, amongst them Roosevelt and Adenauer, who wanted to end the cyclus of wars in Europe between countries. This has been a plan of (the better breed of) politicians rather than of citizens. The ultimate goal was not One Europe, but Peace in Europe. Some later politicians, however, had the strong opinion that Europe had to become One Nation ultimately in order to permanently prevent future wars amongst its members.

The emerging markets (China, India, South-East Asia) were used by those idealists. Let's call them European citizens, as these people do feel no hesitation to call themselves as such. They are right that it is a pure necessity for European countries to work together in at least the economical sphere. Else, we'll be the third world within, let's say, 20 years. The European citizens were able to convince the rest that econimical cooperation is necessary. They even convinced the rest that it's a good thing to try to have at least a basic set of shared morals and ethics (leading to laws that must be applied in every member country), but 'the rest' is not at all convinced that it should go any further. There are many differences between the various countries, either real or merely perceived at a subconscious level, and nationalistic feelings are huge. Although not many Dutch citizens would have called themselves nationalistic a decade ago, they are nowadays prepared to admit those feelings.

The Dutch have said NO in a referendum whether or not we would agree with one constitution for the whole union. There is now a treaty in effect that is similar in many aspects to the treaty/constitution we said no to, but ít cannot be mentioned a constitution.

The U.S. model of federal states and one president who can overrule all governors is a nightmare for Europe, simply because the borders between European countries also reflect significant cultural borders.