EU & Demokratiska bakslag : en beskrivande idéanalys av debatten om Köpenhamnsdilemmat

Sammanfattning: The EU is an organisation built on the concept of democracy. However, recent developments within certain member-states clearly contradict this claim. A paradox has hence occurred, which is referred to as the “Copenhagen-Dilemma”; only fully democratic states can become members of the union - but once a membership exists, the EU has proven inadequate to deal with democratic backsliding-tendencies. This essay argues that the political debate regarding this dilemma constitutes of at least two main categories of articles and within each of these, three positions can be found: Those focusing on causes to the problem and further how it can be understood are the ‘problem-oriented’ articles. Those arguing for solutions to the Copenhagen-dilemma are the ‘solution-oriented’ articles. Voices within this second category have been examined further in the analysis. They all accept the democratic deficit to be a problem for the EU – but the three positions offer different perceptions on how it can be countered most effectively: 1) The Conservatives; argues that the EU should use the tools already available and instead change their praxis 2) The Reformists; argues that the EU should further develop and reform the available tools 3) The Radicals; argues that the problem has caused a need for new institutions and tools to be created within the EU