My proposal is to call the 4 circles: 1) Core 2) Inner Rim 3) Expansion Region 4) Outer Rim I would also suggest to add a fifth circle, comprising everything else past the Outer Rim, to be called "Unknown Regions". On a side note, from now on in official EU documents the United Kingdom shall be known as "Confederacy of Independent Systems" (abbreviated in CIS), at least until successful reintegration of all its members in the -Galactic Republic- European Union.

This is *not a EU plan* but merely an academic report (Sailing on High Seas: Reforming and Enlarging the EU for the 21st Century) which specifically says that it does not represent the views of German or French governments on the cover page. In 60 pages there is only one mention of the UK: 'Associate Members: A first outer tier could allow for streamlining the different forms of association with the EEA countries, Switzerland or even the UK'.

Maybe I'm missing here, but I feel like a multitier Europe already exists. It's just not formally so. It seems to me that the plurality (not necessarily the majority) of these reforms would just realize such a tiered system that Europeans already perceive. But then again, this is outside my expertise, so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

You missed the Eurozone members Finland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. Due to the upcoming enlargement of the Eurozone with Bulgaria, I can live very well with its adition to the zone right now.

The reason ads are so annoying is because its the exact same ad for an entire week on like 5 channels, so by Wednesday I’m sick of it.

These "second hand" memberships are a really dangerous way of integrating countries.The reason why the entry rules are so strict is because once a country becomes member,they have to be on the same standards of other EU nations,or else this inequality will have catastrophic affects on both sides of the population...

I don't think the idea is to make a multi-tiered Europe with second- class countries, I think the idea is to restructure and reform the pathway to the full integration so that more resources can be allocated to the whole process. There are a lot of countries that want to join the EU that do not align with EU values and have made no real efforts to change.

It's a great way to let only those who wish to integrate do so without stripping autonomy from others but other EU members will no doubt start feeling second class

this is why TLDR News EU is the most profitable, no major news network ever covers the paperwork foundation of the European Union along with how the EU affects current events.

I'm not sure about your thumbnail map... The baltics and Finland already have the euro... you want to kick them out? 😂

Once again I thank you for putting the subtitles.

There are people which said this would happen years ago. It's something that's been on the agenda for a long time now. You can find reports from 10+ years ago also advocating for a multi-tiered EU. It's one of the things they keep discussing at these endless events/conferences/dinners/parties that those guys keep going to. They really want countries like Turkey or Ukraine to join, but it's pretty difficult to get them to join under the usual rules, so they want to get them to "half join", and once they've half joined that can speed up the process to them fully joining, at least that's the hope. UK Column have been reporting on this since at least 2016. Contact them and they will be able to provide you with a LOT more information if you are interested.

Marcon's vanity project will end when he goes out the door in 18 months.

"All members are equal. But some members are more equal than others."

Baltic states are in Schengen and in Eurozone and should be coloured accordingly in the thumbnail

I think a more flexible EU is more robust. What doesn´t bend, will break. Maybe the UK would still be in the EU if they could´ve just desintegrated one step. There are also always populists in every country that will use the the perception of the EU as this faraway tyrannical force that control their everyday life as reason for leaving. A more flexible EU would undermine that narrative (true or not). Hungary for example could desintegrate and be allowed more autonomacy, whilst simultaneously losing some benefits of course.

I really appreciated the depth you went into in such a short amount of time in this video! Much love TLDR.

Perhaps the plan could be simplified further into just two tiers: EU and Hungary.

France and Germany trying to make a newer cooler group chat

This would have been a good idea a few years ago. Would have saved alot of headache between the UK and EU if they had this idea before Brexit

Main difficulty is that trade deals go sour owing to exchange rates, which are often speculatively driven when the values must lie within some range, as was the case with the infamous snake-in-a-tunnel exchange rate controls prior to the euro. To use the euro, you really must be up to full standard. So, multi-tier is likely to be a necessary mess, as was the pre-euro EU itself. Ensuring only a core group are involved in, say, Schengen-style free movement and a common currency, mostly Franco-German-Benelux, is preferable to continent-wide migration.

So basicly more power for top6? No, gonna pass...

0:52 That really looks like the train where they signed the Armistice (except for the flatscreen TV)

Could you do a video about the new EU Agency AMLA (Anti-Money Laundering Authority); its implications, competencies, race to host its headquarters, etc. Thank you!!

From a Hungarian perspective: The EU needs more central control over regional development funds, to prevent corrupt governments from misusing (stealing) the funds. Unfortunately democracy allows the election of corrupt and autocratic governments, but those governments lose their power if they couldn't divert EU funds to fund their corrupt system. The worst offender is Hungary, but Slovakia and Ukraine can quickly become "good" contenders, with the election of Fico, and Ukraine has always been very corrupt. Unfortunately the Soviet Union and the former Eastern Bloc countries were built on corruption (like China and Russia are to this day), and even after switching to free elections, the systems are hard to change, and the remnants of the old system still haunt us today.

For a second I thought the EU will be implement lootboxes and a new subscription service.

thank you for the video

As usual a very clear description. But how does the concept of “ coalition of the willing” fit into the concentric circle concept? What the report describes is quite what exists today. The reality is much more complicated, maybe overlapping circles with different configurations of members. Report also doesn’t as described deal with the differing concept of integration of existing members. So if a current member wants less integration their only option is to leave the EU to join an outer ring?

I think it's about time! But also it needs a stronger emphasis on the defense of the continent. We did it for the energy, agriculture, and immigration (somewhat), we need a better integrated defense as well.

Can we have the link to this Franco-German proposal?

The reforms are a good idea, but i think it should really be that the 1st two tiers should basically stay like they are now... with no law and eu government differences, because the EUs non Euro and non Schengen members are still full members .

3:01 error: Switzerland is not in the EEA, bur rather the EFTA.

4:29 « democratic countries in North Africa ». Name one ! None are anywhere near the Human Rights in any country of the EU.

This is the kind of content I like

You have just described how things are with some circles

An excellent summary of a hauntingly complex subject

In other words, the EPC gets upgraded from a talkshop to a Talkshop.

Adjusting to reality is the best world can do.

Recommendation: upload the audio of these videos to podcast platforms for an even wider reach!

I am rather for fewer seats, and I mean a lot of fewer seats like every country have very very few seats like (One seat per area): 1 main, 1 climate, 1 economy, 1 army, 1 transport. Per country, then every country have their own assembly per area. The main seat would take up the position about things which would affect the country overall, while also adding topics which came up late in their own assembly for different reasons. For this to really work so would all member countries need to give a list of topics they want to take up/talk about at least one month before the meeting so their respective assemblies can talk about it, come up with questions etc. for every topic, and the topics gets taken randomly if not decided in an earlier meeting. After a topics is taken up every country gets to ask a question about it and the country which took it up would then spend up to 30min organizing answers to answer their questions, then after like 3 hours (maybe more, maybe less) they can vote for : accept, reject, postpone, continue. It would need MASSIVE reform, but I think member states would feel like they get more power, they can organize themselves better, etc. I personally feel that any move in this kind of direction would be good.

A multi speed EU could work, but power will always remain in the inner core of countries, which for now is Euro Zone countries, in other words, countries that are at arm's length, would they really be comfortable with the idea of more powers shifting more towards inner core countries? Inner core countries will end up with far more advantages, not to mention that they are more likely willing to integrate, which will give them more advantages over the other core countries. I do think it can still work, but I have to wonder about the countries that are hanging back, their influence overtime would become smaller over time, it would also put more pressure on the outer core countries to want into the inner core, a bit like how gradually, more countries keep joining the Euro and to put it another way, the inner core countries make the rules, the other ones abide it, in the case of the EU now, you've got a few layers, the Euro Zone, the EU and EEC countries, it's not hard to imagine over the long run where the voting patterns are going to go, especially in Euro Zone countries as they become more integrated with each other, that puts the rest in a difficult position, especially the ones that don't want to integrate, it basically means they become rule takers or it pushes them fully out of the EU and it's only going to get worse for the likes of Poland and Hungary as more eastern EU countries join the Euro as it ends up isolating the remaining countries and that will in time translate into political power in favour of Euro Zone countries. So even though a multi speed EU can work and might be the best solution for the time being, I think eventually, it's going to lead to most if not all countries being pulled into the inner core, otherwise, their inelegance will in time become weaker, almost to the degree that they could become rule takers, which ironically could be the best way to get rid of the countries in the EU that don't want the project to work or are in for selfish reasons, after all, if you look at it, countries that drag their feet, the UK, Poland, Hungary and the likes, these will hold back on many areas like the Euro, now that might not be an issue for them now, but it's a given that more powers will be concentrated on the inner core groups of countries and that is Euro Zone countries, or to be blunt about it, the rest are not that important and let's not kid ourselves, power is always going to shift towards the inner core countries because of integration, the UK found that out by more or less being pushed aside by others in the inner core of the EU when the UK was in the EU, the same will very likely happen to those other countries unless they become more integrated.

What people don't understand is that the Inner Circle, most likely the Inner Six, the former founding members will integrate further and the other members who are not part of said Inner Cirlce will have no say in how ot develops as they are no part of it.

I once read a poem about a place with concentric circles.

the dispair

Trade deals are well and fine for industry, currency integration may be a nice way for governments to limit their own financial sovereignty, but I suspect for citizens, the only important bits are the freedom of movement, and actual freedom, in a charter of rights. Perhaps I missed it, but I didn’t hear which of the tiers these would be fit into.

Good morning TLDR! Love your content. Could you please make a video on the upcoming parliamentary elections and referendum in Poland? The campaign of each side and the impact the results could have on Europe?

Small correction: while Switzerland could be considered having an associate membership, it is not part of the EEA in contrast to what was mentioned here.

Right now we have a 27 tier project with at least 30 satellites, circling around uncoordinated. As soon as two start to cluster they can create black holes from where escape isn't possible. Reforms are needed, but it's impossible to even get two willing ones on one line.

Veto power must be removed and more power to the european parlament is necessary

The reason I watched was because Finland wasn't in the thumbnail and I was interest in what group we would be put into. Yes I am Finnish, how did you guess?

3:02 Switzerland is actually not in the European Economic Area! I discovered this the hard way: my phone had free roaming in the EEA, and upon arriving in Switzerland I found that it didn't work there

This proposal does not seem to move the needle much. Granted four neat types seems optimistic to begin with, since it would not be surprising if ended up 20+ groupings with large amounts of overlapping groups, and multiple niche organizations with few members.

One does not simply enter the EU. It's a land full of bureaucraty.

It should be highly incentivised to rise to the highest tier of membership. But I think that it's suuuper important that there is a smaller tier. Strongest benefits should be part of the top tier.

Good video, but switzerland is not in the eea. They have separate agreements instead

The “Schengen” mention in the inner-most circle is a bit confusing, since current EFTA members (Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein) and Switzerland, are all part of the Schengen area. As well as micro-countries like Monaco, San Marino, Vatican (but not Andorra though) that are de facto part of it. So Schengen doesn’t necessarily feels like the deepest integration when you consider that 25% of the 30 member states are not even part of the EU

“Unruly members” :):):) I.e. if a country does not submit to the colonizers’ rules, then Germany and France are unable to exploit, therefore you are labeled “unruly”.

Ah, but do all tiers are subject to EU council in the same way?? Not enjoying full integration, but obyeing all decisions even if no vote. If so, is another cast system.

I think more than four rings are needed. One, in particular, should be added at the core for those country that are already mostly integrated.

It would be a different situation in the AU, where it might need regional integration before total convergence into a theoretical EU-esque AU.

I do not think countries not in the EU itself should benefit from the Single market like Norway and Switzerland, it just seems a bit hypocritical. If non EU members get that benefit then any country should be able to access the single market such as the US. Canada, Mexico etc

7:47 I think 2 more important decisions to look-out for would be whether to grant Candidacy to 🇬🇪Georgia & re-open negotiaitions with 🇹🇷Türkiye. Nice video!!

It shows that some countries are more equal than others.

I bet you didn't see Volt banners in the background at 6:46

I have never liked the idea of a multi-tier europe, because i feel like some countries would only want to grab the advantages of being in the eu without any of the drawbacks, i always wanted a huge reform of the union and get rid of the unanimity principle, but at this point i think the only way for a more integrated union is a multi tiered one

Poland and Hungary want expansion before reform. But they keep demonstrating how we absolutely need reforms before expansion, or else we will transform the EU in some sort of statue unable to move in anyway or decide anything.

Too Long Didn't Research yet again. It's such a joy to watch this channel.

some reasonable things in here, but the fact that there is a provision for a "coalition of the willing" and that this is drawn up mainly by France and Germany makes it hard to not worry about it becoming a system of permanent limbo for some...

I don't really like the idea of capping the amount of seats in the European Parliament, it would really undermine the idea that EU is democratic. I'd even argue that 750 MEP is too few for a Union of 450 million citizens. 900 MEPs should really be the number of seats today, 1 MEP representing 500 thousand people, which is similar to Malta's population today. Today, Malta is overrepresented in seats while Germany is underrepresented. higher number of seats should alleviate the lack of representation in the parliament.

As a french, I think the veto thing has to go before we agree to more people getting in, how are we supposed to lead a democracy that need 100% agreement on important subject? I'm willing to unify europe more and enlarge it but not the union behave only as an economic union that is held by a few countries. The more country enter the union curently, the harder it will be to unify and I have suspission that it's the aim of somme countries that actually want the EU to remain divided extremely decentralized with no power uppon it's member states.

Why are the Baltic countries and Finland not part of the inner circle in the thumbnail? They are part of the Eurozone and the Schengen area

Well you've got the inner planes and outer planes which seperate into positive planes and negative planes, there's also the far realms

eu. stay stong, stay connected. dont need to agree on absolutely everything but its crucial to be able to cooperate and stay friendly for all people within the eu circles

As if globalization hasn’t already failed for every person that’s not dirt poor or piss rich.

Lol @ “A team of experts”.

More flexible means also easy to leave

Reform will only go so far if the EU remains bound to unanimity among its member states, but what country will consent to empowering the EU to impose its laws upon them regardless of their own vote?

I’m likely way off the mark, but it almost sounds like a plan for Germany and France to try and maintain their own hegemony within the union.

The pain going to preorder Too Long and realising I'm a couple days late

So what about places like Ireland where they have the euro but are not Schengen or places like Denmark where they have the opposite?

Both Moldova and Ukraine are countries without control over their territory, or put it in other way, with part of their territories disputed. So the talks are empty, there is no possibility of such countries joining the EU.

If this had been offered prior to 2016, I wonder if this would have changed the Brexit vote.

An excellent summary of avdaun

This is interesting: it mirrors the process of culturation in a way. The EPC 2.0 then becomes a title which allows a country acclamation before eventually deciding their ideal position within the geographically determined political superstructure. What would we call this? Can it still be classified as a federalist system?

Isnt the outer tier what Cameron was requesting of EU before the to referendum? Could a lot of bad blood have been avoided not only internally within the UK, but also between the UK and Brussels if the EU have accepted then that these reforms are probably necessary for their future expansion?

Montenegro should be next country to join EU

3:03 Switzerland is not in the EEA. It has its own bilateral agreement with the EU.

It is likely that the EPC would allow the economic growth and stability that are required for EU membership, not nearly for all but alleviating the division created with fluidity

Ukraine doesn’t want to be in “multi tier”! We want to be a part of EU!!

The main problem with the current EU is that not every country that got accepted can execute EU policies on the same level as more "advanced" countries with more seniority inside the EU. Even if a country does get accepted after years of probation mumbo jumbo, the said country might not be able to keep up with the rest of EU's members. This new multi-tier solution, in my opinion, is trying to address this problem. But it can also potentially give birth to jealousy, slanders, and lack of unity. Regardless, ppl should not look at this multi-tier system as a way to divide membership within the EU, but more like different kind of memberships - each catered for different circumstances of the EU members. Maybe changing the way this system being called or described can help it to gain more approval. Using terms "tiers" or "circles" is inherently problematic and should be avoided.

3:00 Huh, those circles make no sense since Norway, Switzerland and Iceland are all members of the core Schengen area!

Love you Ben, its Always good know what happens in the world from TLDR

If this was a thing 10 years ago Brexit would never have happened

Ironic. Britain argued some of these ideas pre-Brexit and were told "non-non" and "nein-nein". QMV will mean that Germany-France and inner circle will always get their way. Britain better off charting our own course.

I don't know... this reform feels like putting a lipstick on a pig and calling it a super model...

I think EU should go in opposite direction. You either in EU or not. If a country is part of UE it should use euro, be in Schengen etc.

I feel a Baldrick moment coming on "I have a cunning plan" let's see if they fall for this one and then we can stick on this and that and that and this so we can control them the way we wanted in the first place.

The idea of a tiered Europe is intriguing, but I can't help but feel it might dilute the core essence of the EU. The shift from unanimity to qualified majority voting could be a game-changer, but I wonder how many nations would be on board? Also, the mention of Skillshare felt a bit out of place in such a heavy topic, but hey, we all gotta learn somehow, right? 😅🇪🇺

the malty tier system is not perfect but nothing really is as long as its an improvement on what we have now its a win and getting rid of unanimity voting is essential as it causes many problems

1:50 Weird presentation choice. Latvia's flag is not a do-not-enter sign. Like all flags, it's rectangular, not round.