[nabla9]

Revisionist conflation is silly, but Germany definitely is the main power within EU.

EU decision making for big issues:

1. Leaders of France and Germany meet to draw out a plan.

2. They negotiate with few other big countries to form a block. Valuable horse-trading happens here.

3. The European Council meets and small countries realize that the table is already made for them. They are never part of the process from the start. They are allowed to do some tweaks but that's it.

[Certhas]

Except that that's also a caricature that hasn't been true in a while.

Germany is one of several large powers in the EU, but small countries have considerable influence, and can and do block decisions/legislation all the time. That's why there is a push to end the national vetos on various issues.

Seriously, the idea that the EU, where the smallest country has a veto over virtually everything, and where Germany is the largest of several large democratic powers, and where everything that happens is a compromise negotiated carefully while balancing dozens of competing interests, is in _any_ way related to "what Germany wanted in WWII" is deeply offensive.

And yet I've encountered it again and again, online and in person. This type of idiotic idea, unbound by the reality of what the EU is and does, and enabled and encouraged by opportunistic press and politicians, is exactly what brought us Brexit.

[nabla9]

> in _any_ way related to "what Germany wanted in WWII" i

I was not arguing that and I specially said so in the beginning. Brits are just sore because they won the war but lost the peace (relative to Germany).

Small countries have veto power, but using veto always creates a crisis. That's not proper way to do decisions, but Germany forces it to others.

The inability to be part of the decision process from the beginning is real problem. You either vote to spoil everything or get small confessions, but you are never part of the inner circle.

[Certhas]

A threat of veto makes sure proposals don't get to the table. If Germany had had its way, many countries would have taken on refugees in recent years.

I also don't accept the idea that others don't have a place at the table for discussions during the drafting phases. These are often run by the EC where smaller countries are represented.

However, the asymmetry of EU members is also really extreme. Germany has 160 times as many inhabitants as Malta. Germany, the UK, France and Italy already make up 54% of EU population.[1]

With the UK out, the four biggest, Germany, France, Italy and Spain will be at more than 57%. So obviously there is a really difficult balancing act here.

But really, please point to any development in the last 5 years or so that functioned according to the "Germany and France decide and the EU goes in that direction". Germany and France wanted a Tobin Tax and couldn't get it, Germany wanted refugees to be distributed and couldn't get it, Germany and France wanted stricter Tax rules in the EU and didn't get it. They wanted to end unanimty on Tax rules and it looks like they are not getting that either.

[1] If you think back to the start of the EU, among the 6 founding members Germany and France represented more than 2/3rds of the population. So the top four countries together don't have nearly as much weight as France/Germany had in the beginning. I guess this is the main reason that the France-Germany axis is not as prominent as it once was.

[dvdcxn]

> 1. Leaders of France and Germany meet to draw out a plan.

So...the main power in Europe is not Germany, it's 'France and Germany'. Important distinction.

[nabla9]

Germany is definitely the leading force behind the two, but yes, they work closely together.