EPIN-应对COVID-19的欧盟危机（英文）-2020.4-19页_323kb

Summary of EU Crisis Response in Tackling Covid-19: Views from Member States

Core Content

The Covid-19 crisis has revealed significant challenges in European cooperation, particularly in areas where the EU only has legal competences. Initially, member states were inward-looking, focusing on national crisis management and border closures. European solidarity was largely absent. However, as the pandemic progressed, the similarities in lockdown experiences across the EU became evident, prompting a shift towards European-level crisis management.

The European Commission and European Central Bank (ECB) have played key roles in responding to the crisis. The ECB has committed up to €750 billion in interventions, while the Commission proposed the Coronavirus Response Investment Initiative (CRII) and an escape clause in fiscal rules. Despite these efforts, public support for EU measures remains limited, and the EU's ability to demonstrate added value in crisis management is still under scrutiny.

Main Views from Member States

General Perceptions

• EU response is seen as too little, too late in most member states.
• Public opinion varies widely: some citizens expect more EU involvement, while others believe the EU has made no difference.
• Economic recovery is now seen as a key area where the EU should take the lead.
• Coordination among member states is crucial for a unified response, but divergent national approaches have hindered this.

Regional and National Perspectives

Key Initiatives and Outcomes

• Pandemic Emergency Purchase Programme (PEPP) by the ECB: €750 billion allocated to support the European economy.
• Coronavirus Response Investment Initiative (CRII): Proposed to use unused cohesion funds, but requires member state approval.
• Green lanes: EU guidelines to ensure free movement of goods and reduce border backlogs, which have been well-received.
• SURE initiative: Joint financial support for short-time work, but not widely accepted as "fresh money".
• Coronabonds: Renewed calls for common debt issuance, but reluctant acceptance by some member states, especially Germany.

Critical Observations

• The north-south divide in the EU remains a concern, especially in terms of financial solidarity.
• Public health is not a shared competence of the EU, which has limited its ability to act in this area.
• The role of the EU in economic recovery is seen as essential, but national sovereignty and political resistance continue to challenge this.
• Narratives around the EU's response have been influenced by geopolitical tensions, particularly with Russia and China being perceived as more supportive in the early stages.
• National leaders and political elites often undermine EU solidarity, while public opinion in some countries has shifted towards a greater appreciation of the EU's role in crisis management.

Post-Crisis Expectations

• The EU should take the lead in coordinating exit strategies and economic recovery.
• Member states must allow EU institutions to play a more active role.
• Coordinated solutions such as green lanes, labour mobility, and common debt instruments could help overcome current restrictions and promote greater solidarity.
• Public support for EU competences in public health emergencies should encourage greater burden-sharing and constructive EU engagement.

Conclusion

The Covid-19 crisis has tested the resilience and solidarity of the EU. While some member states have reduced their Euroscepticism, others continue to challenge EU integration. The EU's ability to act collectively is crucial for economic recovery and maintaining cohesion, but political resistance and divergent national priorities remain significant obstacles.