Time and time again a dangerous vision resurfaces on our beloved continent. This vision is nothing less than the concept of a United States of Europe, with the ultimate goal of creating a new European empire. While at first sight it may seem like an ambitious aspiration, throughout Europe’s history it has carried an unavoidable risk: the gradual erosion of national sovereignty through a creeping expansion of powers.
Today, efforts to build a United States of Europe are stronger than ever.
We are living in an age of crises—migration, the global pandemic, the war in Ukraine, declining competitiveness, inflation and economic slowdown. Yet too often these crises have been accompanied by efforts to centralize decision-making further, shifting the balance of competences without explicit Treaty amendment.
This gradual shift raises a fundamental question about the future direction of European integration. The expansion of powers is called ‘competence creep’ and it occurs through re- or misinterpretation of legal bases, soft law mechanisms, politically conditioned access to funds, expansive judicial reasoning or political pressure. This is not merely a technical question; it goes to the very core of national sovereignty.
The Myth of an ‘Ever Closer’ Union
European integration is currently driven by political myths. One of the most persistent is what Minister for European Union Affairs János Bóka often refers to as the myth of the ‘ever closer union’. According to this political doctrine, deeper integration is not only desirable but inevitable—an irreversible process embedded in the very DNA of the European institutions. This aspiration has been transformed into a quasi-constitutional mandate for centralization, irrespective of electoral outcomes or national democratic choices.
The sovereigntist position offers a different understanding. Member States are the masters of the Treaties and the architects of Europe’s future. They created the Union to cooperate more effectively in certain areas—not to dissolve themselves into a centralized political structure. Sovereignty does not vanish at the European level; it remains anchored in the constitutional identity of Member States, whether or not they are exercised jointly in areas defined by the Treaties.
‘Sovereignty and independence are not abstract constitutional concepts but a recently restored historical reality’
For Central Europe, this is not an abstract issue. For our nations, sovereignty and independence are not abstract constitutional concepts but a recently restored historical reality following decades of external domination. We did not join the EU to surrender our sovereignty anew. We entered into a grand bargain: by sharing certain competences, we would be stronger together. But the foundation of that bargain was mutual respect, and a clear system of checks and balances based on the Treaties. The EU seems to be drifting further and further away from this bargain.
A Systematic Review of Competences
The Hungarian government has recently launched a systematic review of the competences of the European Union. It is not a symbolic gesture, but a constitutional necessity in response to the systematic blurring of competences within the Union.
Hungary’s competence audit is part of a broader European debate about the balance between Union and Member State competences. It follows precedents set by other Member States, including the United Kingdom’s Balance of Competences Review and the Dutch subsidiarity review. Hungary’s initiative continues this European tradition of responsible constitutional self-examination.
The systematic review focuses on five key areas that greatly impact Hungarian citizens’ living conditions and where competence creep has become particularly visible: economic policy, energy, migration, rule of law, and the triad of education, culture and family policy.
The objective of the review is clarity on: Where is competence-sharing beneficial? Where does it constrain national decision-making beyond Treaty intent? And why are existing subsidiarity and proportionality controls insufficient in practice?
The process included six thematic professional conferences organized with a detailed focus on each key area of the review—areas where recent institutional practice has demonstrated the most visible departure from the original balance of competences. As a result, a collection of studies from external expert contributions from research institutes and universities is being completed.
Towards a Europe of Nations
In recent years, competence creep has intensified across the Union. If we fail to draw a clear line between national sovereignty and supranational ambition—if we cannot say: ‘This is enough’—then a ‘United States of Europe’ will become the natural and inevitable outcome of European integration.
The competence review serves a strategic purpose. It maps the mechanisms through which EU institutions extend their influence beyond explicit conferral, and it identifies where institutional practice risks undermining national democratic autonomy.
‘Europe must never become a place where unity replaces freedom’
Europe does not simply exist in a vacuum. It is not a technocratic project, but a civilizational community built on clear foundations, foremost among them its Judeo–Christian heritage. European integration must build on these foundations, not dismantle them. We must recall the lessons of history. The strength of Europe has always come from its nations—from our traditions, our sovereignty, and our will to cooperate freely.
Hungary will not remain a mere spectator to this transformation. We will be a firm voice for balance, fairness, and respect for the Treaties.
Europe must never become a place where unity replaces freedom. Let us take back control of European cooperation—not against Europe, but for Europe. Let us restore the promise of a Europe of Nations: together we are stronger than alone, while still remaining who we are.
Related articles:
