There will always be different approaches and understandings as our continent is so colourful. I do not think that we can imagine that everything will be united. We shall respect diversity. Nobody is talking anymore about being “united in diversity”, as this was the case decades ago. This was a motto of the EU.
The bigger we are, the more we should respect the differences.
Defining these differences involve being heard by the highest courts in Europe. Namely, it might be that some differences are not acceptable to common European standards, and political consequences might follow. But, the involvement of the highest courts to be heard would raise the legitimacy of a decision (that, for example, certain Member States would not like).
The CJEU and the national constitutional courts offer two different perspectives on the European integration. The former’s view gravitates toward a federal state, while the latter’s conception is anchored in the cooperation of sovereign states. Is there a way to reconcile these two concepts?
I would be careful with these two extreme visions. When we are talking about European integration, there is always a certain level of sovereignty at stake. During the whole history of European integration we have struggled to find where the limits of sovereignty transfers are. I think that as long as the Member States only confer certain limited powers upon the European Union, it remains a path we can follow.
The more remarkable is the diversity in the integration, the softener the approach should be
and we should be all heard. Using force or threat to glue us together is not democratic. In my childhood, I lived in a state which was forced to be together. It did not end well. It never does. I have learned that. Instead, my approach to Europe is a very cautious bottom-up approach which would respect diversity.
Democracy is indeed a slow and difficult, challenging process.