The people of Europe do not desire more integration; they prefer less integration. Individuals are hesitant to embark on new yet unfamiliar European coasts. They wish to wait and observe how all the incomplete projects already initiated are completed to a positive conclusion.

Although the euro has been successfully implemented, populist anxieties persist that it has obstructed development, elevated job issues and is a cause of numerous national financial issues. Every incomplete project served, and continues to serve, as an invitation to the advocates to unite various forms of anti-European feelings and create a large coalition of adversaries.

Some oppose additional enlargement, others resist the euro, and the majority blame Europe for national problems. They are against increasingly open national boundaries and undesired assaults on the existing state of political rights distribution.

The positive news is that Europe will not cease to exist. The European Union will not collapse into its regional components. The process of European integration cannot be undone. It will simply cease for some time. Politicians will have the essential time to consider the future of Europe.

They may begin by considering the reasons for their failure. Why haven't European individuals accompanied their political leaders? Why have individuals dismissed a constitution that could have introduced greater democracy, increased transparency and enhanced a greater chance to get involved?

Firstly, European leaders have to communicate much more convincingly the philosophical, emotional and also spiritual foundation of the European integration process. They have to make clear to their populations what "Europe" means, is and should be. What is the common foundation for a Europe reaching from the Atlantic Ocean to the Black Sea? Is there something that makes Europe special and different from other forms of institutional agreements or multilateral arrangements?

Secondly, politicians in Europe have to demonstrate that they are not simply using Europe as a cheap excuse to shift urgent problems from the national to the European level. Nowadays, it looks as if national decision-makers misuse hectic European activities as a substitute for political action that should be taken at a national level.

There were so many reforms that governments should have initiated back home to stimulate employment and economic growth. However, national politicians are afraid to do what has to be done due to the expected severe political protests of all the different opponents of structural change.

Moreover, it seems that national governments play a tricky game. They speak European but act national. They take the national applause for European success but blame Europe for all the burdens they have to place on their national voters, which is cynical enough because at least some of their national decisions make European life more difficult. The delay of the right to the free exchange of services, the frivolous neglect of the stability pact, and the populist debates over intra-European fiscal dumping in the new member states are just the most obvious examples.

Europe seems to be something for Sunday speeches but not for everyday hard work.

In the eyes of too many Europeans, the rush of politicians towards a European constitution or a further enlargement looks as if policymakers want to take the bull by the horns instead of doing their homework first. They rush into an unknown European adventure without having done the necessary risk-minimising preparations. It is naïve to expect political leaders to think and act to maximise European interests.

Neither are European interests well-defined, nor would such a strategy be honoured by the national electorates. Consequently, enough European leaders still think nationally and use Europe as an instrument to achieve their national goals. As long as this is the case, they should not blame their voters for seeing through their games and answering the same way: by using Europe to punish their national politicians.

Be that as it may, on the face of it, events of recent months seem to have strengthened the EU and opened up a promising future. It is always said that it is in crises that European integration makes progress.

The last few years have confirmed this adage. In a world that has become more uncertain and clearly more hostile, Europhobia has receded and 'leaving Europe' no longer appeals to many. Even the leader of the French Rassemblement National, Marine Le Pen, and the Italian far-right prime minister, Giorgia Meloni, have abandoned this idea, while in Britain 'Brexit' is now widely recognised as a disaster.

In July 2020, the EU also broke a critical taboo by creating a mutual debt for the first time, to the substantial amount of €750 billion, to cushion the economic and social consequences of the pandemic while speeding up the green and digital transitions. This initiative, unthinkable just a few months earlier, was in the end almost unanimously welcomed.

Yet many clouds are gathering from three sources at once: the internal political dynamics of the union, the geopolitical level, and finally the economic situation. And it seems unlikely that Europe will be able to cope effectively with this combination.

Without US help, Europeans are hardly in a position to increase their autonomous defence capabilities overnight.

The European Union and its member states are facing a multi-faceted crisis whose outcome will determine the future of the European project.

But then again, Europe and Europeans have already shown that, in the face of adversity, they are capable of leaps forward that seemed impossible at the outset.