United Federation of Planets=European Union?

[Mysterion]

Was just reading an article describing the structure of the European Union, and it struck me that it seem very similar to what we know about the structure of the United federation of Planets in Star Trek (but I am not suggesting a direct link in the ST universe). Member countries/worlds have sovereignty, but defer to a central Council headed by a President. There is free travel amongst member countries/worlds, and policy in many areas (trade, defense, agriculture, etc.) seem to be decided by the central government.

Thought, comments? Am I way off on this?

 

[DevilEyes]

Yes, I've thought about the similarity. It's the closest comparison one can make with an existing organization on Earth - though, of course, there are differences. European Union defense is mostly in the domain of the nation states, and there is no organization comparable to the Starfleet. In addition, most, but not all of them are members of NATO, which, also includes other, non-EU countries, and arguably the most powerful NATO country is not from EU.

Also, EU is geographically defined (even by its very name), and is unlikely to expand beyond certain borders - unlike the UFP.

OTOH, one of the most obvious similarities is that EU has certain demands - related to the economy as well as democracy and human rights issues - that the prospective candidates for membership have to fulfill.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

The Federation, for its part, has (in the novels, anyway) a clearly defined structure, with a President - ONE president - who heads it all. With the EU, there seems to be a lot of overlap and needless bureaucracy, with two or three different presidents of various 'commissions' and 'councils' and all that crap. The EU doesn't seem to be a true 'United States of Europe'.

 

[DevilEyes]

The Federation, for its part, has (in the novels, anyway) a clearly defined structure, with a President - ONE president - who heads it all. With the EU, there seems to be a lot of overlap and needless bureaucracy, with two or three different presidents of various 'commissions' and 'councils' and all that crap. The EU doesn't seem to be a true 'United States of Europe'.

The presidential system was written for UFP because Star Trek is an American show, so it was natural to have the kind of system that exists in USA and that American audiences would understand best. Most European countries have the parliamentary or semi-presidential system, so of course EU has the parliamentary system as well.

I am not sure what the extent of the power of the Federation President is - and if it is any greater than the power of the European Parliament and European Council.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

The presidential system was written for UFP because Star Trek is an American show, so it was natural to have the kind of system that exists in USA and that American audiences would understand best. Most European countries have the parliamentary or semi-presidential system, so of course EU has the parliamentary system as well.

FWIW, the government of United Earth (in Trek) is a mixed system, it has a President (head of state) and a Prime Minister (head of government). But the EU appears to be much more complicated than that.

 

[DevilEyes]

The presidential system was written for UFP because Star Trek is an American show, so it was natural to have the kind of system that exists in USA and that American audiences would understand best. Most European countries have the parliamentary or semi-presidential system, so of course EU has the parliamentary system as well.

FWIW, the government of United Earth (in Trek) is a mixed system, it has a President (head of state) and a Prime Minister (head of government). But the EU appears to be much more complicated than that.

I haven't read many Trek books, so I don't know the details, but what you're describing sounds like either a semi-presidential system, or pure parliamentary system, where the president doesn't have too much power (if any) and most of the executive power is in the hands of the Government lead by the Prime Minister.

If the President is elected in direct elections, it is the semi-presidential system. The President in this case has a certain authority that comes from the fact that he is elected by the voters, and usually a few means to affect the executive and legislative power, but not significantly, as most of the real legislative power lies with the Parliament and executive power with the Government.

Unless you're talking about the parliamentary system, in which the president is not elected in direct elections, but chosen by the parliament. In this case, the president is no more than a figurehead - the equivalent of the monarch in the modern monarchies - and all the real executive authority is in the hands of the Government/Prime Minister. In which case, the non-existence of a president in the EU as opposed to the existence of president in the UFP means nothing at all.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

What I meant was, the Federation is just, well, one organization. It's the Federation Council, headed by the President. Seems fairly simple to understand, yes?

Whereas the EU has all these different bureaucracies, like the European Commission, European Parliament, Council of the European Union, European Council (yes, those two apparently are different ), etc. etc. The Federation isn't that complicated.

 

[Mysterion]

What I meant was, the Federation is just, well, one organization. It's the Federation Council, headed by the President. Seems fairly simple to understand, yes?

Whereas the EU has all these different bureaucracies, like the European Commission, European Parliament, Council of the European Union, European Council (yes, those two apparently are different ), etc. etc. The Federation isn't that complicated.

Am I misunderstanding, then, that the Lisbon Treaty streamlined a lot of this sort of thing?

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ Apparently it didn't...still sounds like this.

 

[Sci]

There are certainly some parallels between the Federation and the European Union -- the most obvious being that it's a union of many different cultures comprised of pre-existing states that chose to join the union and work together in cooperation.

There are a lot of important differences, though. For one thing, the fundamental function of the European Union is to try to end the problem of intra-European wars; whatever else its faults or failures, it's made the idea of an intra-European war virtually unthinkable -- the idea of France, Britain, or Germany going to war with one-another again is today absolutely absurd, and that makes it a definite success story.

On the other hand, there are some very important differences. The most important being that the European Union is not a true state; it is, rather, an association of states that has been delegated from its Members some (but not all) of the functions of a state. It does not, for instance, have the ability to declare war, nor can it control its member states' foreign policies -- that's why 2003 saw some European Union member states supporting and participating in the Iraq War (the United Kingdom, the Kingdom of Spain) while others condemned it and refused (the French Republic, the Federal Republic of Germany). The other important thing to remember about the European Union is that while there is the European Parliament, ultimately the E.U. obeys the governments of its member states rather than the peoples of its member states; that's why the Council of the European Union and the European Council are composed of ministers or heads of government or state from the member states.

Perhaps most strikingly, though it has a common high court, the European Union lacks its own military or gendarmerie. In other words, the European Union lacks the monopoly on the legitimate use of force within its territory, which is perhaps the defining trait of a state.

The United Federation of Planets, by contrast, seems to be just that -- a federal state. We've seen someone identified as the President of the United Federation of Planets in Star Trek IV -- incidentally, he is not identified as the President of the Federation Council in dialogue. We saw in Star Trek IV a later Federation President conducting foreign policy on behalf of the entire Federation, without any need to gain the support of Federation member states' governments. In TNG's "Force of Nature," we hear that the Federation Council has banned Federation ships from traveling above Warp 5 in order to help preserve the fabric of space-time, establishing the Council's legislative authority over Federation territory. In DS9's "Homefront," we saw the Federation President place a Federation member world, Earth, under a state of emergency, placing armed forces loyal to the Federation rather than Earth throughout Earth's territory -- a strong indicator of Federation statehood, as this is the sort of power that alliances and intergovernmental unions lack.

We also discovered that the Federation possesses a Supreme Court in "Dr. Bashir, I Presume?," which seems to possess supreme appellate jurisdiction given its supposed power to overturn Federation laws against genetic engineering. The Federation's ban on genetic engineering itself is another indicator of legislative authority possessed by the Federation.

Perhaps most tellingly of all, however, the Federation seems to possess (along with its member states) the monopoly on the legitimate use of force within its territory (just like federations today do). The Federation operates its Starfleet, which conducts national defense on behalf of the Federation (the military). In Star Trek III we saw Dr. McCoy being arrested by a civilian law enforcement agency called Federation Security -- apparently the Federation's gendarmerie. So the Federation goes to war when the President and Council say so, not when all 150 members agree to it, and it conducts its use of force through organizations loyal to it rather than to its member polities.

Now, it's important to bear in mind that the Federation does share powers with its member states as a federal state would. Individual Federation members seem to have a wide variety of legal practices, for instance. But the preponderance of evidence seems to me to be that the Federation is a federal state rather than an intergovernmental organization like the European Union.

ETA:

I do think it's important to note, however, that many people believe that the European Union is in the process of, and will one day successfully, evolve into a state in its own right.

FWIW, the government of United Earth (in Trek) is a mixed system, it has a President (head of state) and a Prime Minister (head of government). But the EU appears to be much more complicated than that.

That's not necessarily a mixed system at all -- it just means that it's a parliamentary republic rather than a constitutional monarchy. There are numerous parliamentary states today that possess both Presidents and Prime Ministers -- the Federal Republic of Germany, Ireland, the State of Israel, the Italian Republic amongst them. Though the specific English term "Prime Minister" might not be used in favor of equivalent terms like "Federal Chancellor" (Bundeskanzler in German), Taoiseach (Irish Gaelic for "Prime Minister"), "President of the Council of Ministers" (Presidente del Consiglio dei Ministri in Italian), "Head of Government" (Rosh Memshalah in Hebrew), or what have you. But the meaning is the same -- the member of the parliament (MP) who has the confidence of the majority of MPs (usually the MP who leads the majority party), appointed to serve as the head of government (real leader of the country) by the head of state (ceremonial leader of the country) on the basis of that confidence.

In these systems, the President is a mostly ceremonial position, and real power is in the hands of the Prime Minister, who makes all the decisions and advises (which is parliament-ese for "orders") the President to undertake certain policy decisions. It's really just like the British system, except the Queen is replaced with a President.

A truly mixed system would be something like France's semi-presidential system, where the relationship between the President and Prime Minister varies from person to person and situation to situation, and where sometimes the PM is the head of government and other times merely the President's chief lieutenant and the President the head of government.

The various Trek novels -- particularly the ENT Relaunch, A Less Perfect Union, and the short story "Eleven Hours Out" -- have established that the real leader of United Earth is the Prime Minister. The Corps of Engineers novel The Future Begins established the existence of a President of United Earth -- and the character so identified as a historic U.E. President has since appeared in the ENT Relaunch -- but so far the evidence seems to indicate that United Earth is a typical parliamentary republic a la Germany, Ireland, Italy, or Israel.

 

[Mysterion]

^ Apparently it didn't...still sounds like this.

Thank you for that.

(damned Popular Front of Judea...)

 

[DevilEyes]

What I meant was, the Federation is just, well, one organization. It's the Federation Council, headed by the President. Seems fairly simple to understand, yes?

The various Trek novels -- particularly the ENT Relaunch, A Less Perfect Union, and the short story "Eleven Hours Out" -- have established that the real leader of United Earth is the Prime Minister. The Corps of Engineers novel The Future Beginsestablished the existence of a President of United Earth -- and the character so identified as a historic U.E. President has since appeared in the ENT Relaunch -- but so far the evidence seems to indicate that United Earth is a typical parliamentary republic a la Germany, Ireland, Italy, or Israel.

So if I understand this right, Federation system is not mixed at all - it is the parliamentary system (Federation Council = Parliament, the main legislative body; executive power in the hands of the government headed by the Prime Minister) and the President is really nothing but the Chairman/President of the Council? EU has one, too. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_the_European_Parliament

On the other hand, there are some very important differences. The most important being that the European Union is not a true state; it is, rather, an association of states that has been delegated from its Members some (but not all) of the functions of a state. It does not, for instance, have the ability to declare war, nor can it control its member states' foreign policies -- that's why 2003 saw some European Union member states supporting and participating in the Iraq War (the United Kingdom, the Kingdom of Spain) while others condemned it and refused (the French Republic, the Federal Republic of Germany). The other important thing to remember about the European Union is that while there is the European Parliament, ultimately the E.U. obeys the governments of its member states rather than the peoples of its member states; that's why the Council of the European Union and the European Council are composed of ministers or heads of government or state from the member states.

Perhaps most strikingly, though it has a common high court, the European Union lacks its own military or gendarmerie. In other words, the European Union lacks the monopoly on the legitimate use of force within its territory, which is perhaps the defining trait of a state.

The United Federation of Planets, by contrast, seems to be just that -- a federal state. We've seen someone identified as the President of the United Federation of Planets in Star Trek IV -- incidentally, he is not identified as the President of the Federation Council in dialogue. We saw in Star Trek IV a later Federation President conducting foreign policy on behalf of the entire Federation, without any need to gain the support of Federation member states' governments. In TNG's "Force of Nature," we hear that the Federation Council has banned Federation ships from traveling above Warp 5 in order to help preserve the fabric of space-time, establishing the Council's legislative authority over Federation territory. In DS9's "Homefront," we saw the Federation President place a Federation member world, Earth, under a state of emergency, placing armed forces loyal to the Federation rather than Earth throughout Earth's territory -- a strong indicator of Federation statehood, as this is the sort of power that alliances and intergovernmental unions lack.

We also discovered that the Federation possesses a Supreme Court in "Dr. Bashir, I Presume?," which seems to possess supreme appellate jurisdiction given its supposed power to overturn Federation laws against genetic engineering. The Federation's ban on genetic engineering itself is another indicator of legislative authority possessed by the Federation.

Perhaps most tellingly of all, however, the Federation seems to possess (along with its member states) the monopoly on the legitimate use of force within its territory (just like federations today do). The Federation operates its Starfleet, which conducts national defense on behalf of the Federation (the military). In Star Trek III we saw Dr. McCoy being arrested by a civilian law enforcement agency called Federation Security -- apparently the Federation's gendarmerie. So the Federation goes to war when the President and Council say so, not when all 150 members agree to it, and it conducts its use of force through organizations loyal to it rather than to its member polities.

Now, it's important to bear in mind that the Federation does share powers with its member states as a federal state would. Individual Federation members seem to have a wide variety of legal practices, for instance. But the preponderance of evidence seems to me to be that the Federation is a federal state rather than an intergovernmental organization like the European Union.

ETA:

I do think it's important to note, however, that many people believe that the European Union is in the process of, and will one day successfully, evolve into a state in its own right.

It does seem that way. However, while the Federation has many characteristics of a federal state, there are some things that don't fit - like having Vulcan Ambassadors to Earth, Earth Ambassadors to Vulcan, etc. You wouldn't normally have ambassadors or need to establish diplomatic relations between federal constituents, unless they aren't really federal constituents but confederate sovereign states.

Besides, Memory Alpha says that Federation members are free to use different economic models. http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/United_Federation_of_Planets This certainly sounds closer to confederation than a federation, whatever its name may be.

 

[Nevyn]

It's true that there are many similarities between the EU and the UFP, but with limited information about the UFP government, we can't be certain. But these are the simularities: the name, having a president, a council, a hight court (by a different name), shared economical, diplomatic and political interests, a slow bureaucracy, people of many different nationalities united under one flag, a national hymen, a currency, many founding members, some sort of a charter.

Most likely the UFP is what Roddenberry hoped the UNO would one day become.

 

[NIUPonyBoy]

It is similar, but I hope by the time we get to the 24th Century we have moved away from the foolish stupidity of the EU, UN and so called 'progressives' in the US. But then again if we haven't there is no way there will be any of us left alive by then so it wouldn't really matter. lol

 

[barnaclelapse]

There are certainly some parallels between the Federation and the European Union -- the most obvious being that it's a union of many different cultures comprised of pre-existing states that chose to join the union and work together in cooperation.

There are a lot of important differences, though. For one thing, the fundamental function of the European Union is to try to end the problem of intra-European wars; whatever else its faults or failures, it's made the idea of an intra-European war virtually unthinkable -- the idea of France, Britain, or Germany going to war with one-another again is today absolutely absurd, and that makes it a definite success story.

On the other hand, there are some very important differences. The most important being that the European Union is not a true state; it is, rather, an association of states that has been delegated from its Members some (but not all) of the functions of a state. It does not, for instance, have the ability to declare war, nor can it control its member states' foreign policies -- that's why 2003 saw some European Union member states supporting and participating in the Iraq War (the United Kingdom, the Kingdom of Spain) while others condemned it and refused (the French Republic, the Federal Republic of Germany). The other important thing to remember about the European Union is that while there is the European Parliament, ultimately the E.U. obeys the governments of its member states rather than the peoples of its member states; that's why the Council of the European Union and the European Council are composed of ministers or heads of government or state from the member states.

Perhaps most strikingly, though it has a common high court, the European Union lacks its own military or gendarmerie. In other words, the European Union lacks the monopoly on the legitimate use of force within its territory, which is perhaps the defining trait of a state.

The United Federation of Planets, by contrast, seems to be just that -- a federal state. We've seen someone identified as the President of the United Federation of Planets in Star Trek IV -- incidentally, he is not identified as the President of the Federation Council in dialogue. We saw in Star Trek IV a later Federation President conducting foreign policy on behalf of the entire Federation, without any need to gain the support of Federation member states' governments. In TNG's "Force of Nature," we hear that the Federation Council has banned Federation ships from traveling above Warp 5 in order to help preserve the fabric of space-time, establishing the Council's legislative authority over Federation territory. In DS9's "Homefront," we saw the Federation President place a Federation member world, Earth, under a state of emergency, placing armed forces loyal to the Federation rather than Earth throughout Earth's territory -- a strong indicator of Federation statehood, as this is the sort of power that alliances and intergovernmental unions lack.

We also discovered that the Federation possesses a Supreme Court in "Dr. Bashir, I Presume?," which seems to possess supreme appellate jurisdiction given its supposed power to overturn Federation laws against genetic engineering. The Federation's ban on genetic engineering itself is another indicator of legislative authority possessed by the Federation.

Perhaps most tellingly of all, however, the Federation seems to possess (along with its member states) the monopoly on the legitimate use of force within its territory (just like federations today do). The Federation operates its Starfleet, which conducts national defense on behalf of the Federation (the military). In Star Trek III we saw Dr. McCoy being arrested by a civilian law enforcement agency called Federation Security -- apparently the Federation's gendarmerie. So the Federation goes to war when the President and Council say so, not when all 150 members agree to it, and it conducts its use of force through organizations loyal to it rather than to its member polities.

Now, it's important to bear in mind that the Federation does share powers with its member states as a federal state would. Individual Federation members seem to have a wide variety of legal practices, for instance. But the preponderance of evidence seems to me to be that the Federation is a federal state rather than an intergovernmental organization like the European Union.

ETA:

I do think it's important to note, however, that many people believe that the European Union is in the process of, and will one day successfully, evolve into a state in its own right.

FWIW, the government of United Earth (in Trek) is a mixed system, it has a President (head of state) and a Prime Minister (head of government). But the EU appears to be much more complicated than that.

That's not necessarily a mixed system at all -- it just means that it's a parliamentary republic rather than a constitutional monarchy. There are numerous parliamentary states today that possess both Presidents and Prime Ministers -- the Federal Republic of Germany, Ireland, the State of Israel, the Italian Republic amongst them. Though the specific English term "Prime Minister" might not be used in favor of equivalent terms like "Federal Chancellor" (Bundeskanzler in German), Taoiseach (Irish Gaelic for "Prime Minister"), "President of the Council of Ministers" (Presidente del Consiglio dei Ministri in Italian), "Head of Government" (Rosh Memshalah in Hebrew), or what have you. But the meaning is the same -- the member of the parliament (MP) who has the confidence of the majority of MPs (usually the MP who leads the majority party), appointed to serve as the head of government (real leader of the country) by the head of state (ceremonial leader of the country) on the basis of that confidence.

In these systems, the President is a mostly ceremonial position, and real power is in the hands of the Prime Minister, who makes all the decisions and advises (which is parliament-ese for "orders") the President to undertake certain policy decisions. It's really just like the British system, except the Queen is replaced with a President.

A truly mixed system would be something like France's semi-presidential system, where the relationship between the President and Prime Minister varies from person to person and situation to situation, and where sometimes the PM is the head of government and other times merely the President's chief lieutenant and the President the head of government.

The various Trek novels -- particularly the ENT Relaunch, A Less Perfect Union, and the short story "Eleven Hours Out" -- have established that the real leader of United Earth is the Prime Minister. The Corps of Engineers novel The Future Begins established the existence of a President of United Earth -- and the character so identified as a historic U.E. President has since appeared in the ENT Relaunch -- but so far the evidence seems to indicate that United Earth is a typical parliamentary republic a la Germany, Ireland, Italy, or Israel.

Wow. Way to sum it up, man.

Very interesting.

 

[Sci]

What I meant was, the Federation is just, well, one organization. It's the Federation Council, headed by the President. Seems fairly simple to understand, yes?

The various Trek novels -- particularly the ENT Relaunch, A Less Perfect Union, and the short story "Eleven Hours Out" -- have established that the real leader of United Earth is the Prime Minister. The Corps of Engineers novel The Future Beginsestablished the existence of a President of United Earth -- and the character so identified as a historic U.E. President has since appeared in the ENT Relaunch -- but so far the evidence seems to indicate that United Earth is a typical parliamentary republic a la Germany, Ireland, Italy, or Israel.

So if I understand this right, Federation system is not mixed at all - it is the parliamentary system (Federation Council = Parliament, the main legislative body; executive power in the hands of the government headed by the Prime Minister) and the President is really nothing but the Chairman/President of the Council? EU has one, too. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_the_European_Parliament

No. In the portion you just quoted me in, I was talking about the government of United Earth, a Federation Member State, not the United Federation of Planets.

As I noted in my first post, the Federation does not have a Prime Minister; the President is the President of the United Federation of Planets (meaning, president of the state), not the President of the Federation Council. Only once have we seen the Federation President actually work alongside the Council, and that was in ST4; the rest of the time, he's been working independently of them.

United Earth, by contrast, has been established in the novels to be a parliamentary republic, led by a Prime Minister and what seems to be a ceremonial President. But that's United Earth, not the Federation.

 

[Nevyn]

It is similar, but I hope by the time we get to the 24th Century we have moved away from the foolish stupidity of the EU, UN and so called 'progressives' in the US. But then again if we haven't there is no way there will be any of us left alive by then so it wouldn't really matter. lol

Speak for yourself, I intend to become at lest 500 years and three days old.

 

[NIUPonyBoy]

It is similar, but I hope by the time we get to the 24th Century we have moved away from the foolish stupidity of the EU, UN and so called 'progressives' in the US. But then again if we haven't there is no way there will be any of us left alive by then so it wouldn't really matter. lol

Speak for yourself, I intend to become at lest 500 years and three days old.

You won't have a chance if we get socialized medicine.

 

[Ensign_Redshirt]

What I meant was, the Federation is just, well, one organization. It's the Federation Council, headed by the President. Seems fairly simple to understand, yes?

Whereas the EU has all these different bureaucracies, like the European Commission, European Parliament, Council of the European Union, European Council (yes, those two apparently are different ), etc. etc. The Federation isn't that complicated.

That's because the Federation is fiction, while the EU is reality. Nobody wants to bore his viewers with needless facts which governmental body is responsible for what. It's science fiction, not a political drama. So the writers kept the Federation simple.

European Commission - Executive branch, the Cabinet of the EU

European Parliament & Council of the European Union - the two chambers of the legislative branch

European Council - well, that's a special version of the Council of the European Union, consisting of the heads of government of the member states instead of ministers

However, the political system of the EU is not that complicated compared to Germany's for instance. Germany has a president, a chancellor who leads the federal cabinet and two legislative bodies (Bundestag, Bundesrat), each headed by a president of its own.

So, just like the EU has several "presidents" (or at least people who bear that title), Germany has three "presidents" and a Chancellor. The difference to the political system of the United States is merely that the House of Representatives has a "speaker" instead of a "president", and that the Vice President doubles as the President of the Senate.


But as for the original question: The main difference between the Federation and the EU is that the EU's "common" foreign and defense policy exists only on paper for the most part. Each member state is very adamant about its national sovereignty in those fields and as a result everybody does his own thing here.

 

[NIUPonyBoy]

What I meant was, the Federation is just, well, one organization. It's the Federation Council, headed by the President. Seems fairly simple to understand, yes?

Whereas the EU has all these different bureaucracies, like the European Commission, European Parliament, Council of the European Union, European Council (yes, those two apparently are different ), etc. etc. The Federation isn't that complicated.

That's because the Federation is fiction, while the EU is reality. Nobody wants to bore his viewers with needless facts which governmental body is responsible for what. It's science fiction, not a political drama. So the writers kept the Federation simple.

Clearly George didn't get that memo for his new stuff.