Opinion: The World of Hollow Honours and the EU's Meaningless New Medal

Estonian journalist Erkki Bahovski argues that the newly created European Merit Badge, introduced in 2025 to mark the 75th anniversary of the Schuman Declaration, was devalued from the very start by the choice of its first recipients. The piece reflects on the broader trend of awards losing their meaning over time.

Awards, prizes, and honorary titles have a universal problem: they tend to lose their value over time, drifting further and further from the purpose they were originally created to serve. But the new European Merit Badge, launched in 2025 to commemorate the 75th anniversary of the Schuman Declaration, managed to devalue itself before it had even properly begun — the moment its first laureates were announced.

This is the central argument made by Estonian foreign policy commentator [Erkki Bahovski](/politicians/erkki-bahovski) in his latest opinion piece. According to Bahovski, the choice of recipients revealed that the award was less about recognising genuine contribution to the European idea and more about political signalling or institutional box-ticking — a pattern, he suggests, that is all too common in today's ceremony-heavy public life.

The Schuman Declaration of 9 May 1950 is widely regarded as one of the founding documents of what would eventually become the European Union. French Foreign Minister Robert Schuman's proposal for pooling coal and steel production between France and Germany laid the groundwork for decades of European integration. Commemorating its 75th anniversary with a new honour was, in principle, a meaningful gesture.

But Bahovski's critique cuts deeper than just one poorly chosen cohort of medal recipients. He points to a broader cultural tendency — in institutions both national and supranational — to multiply awards and distinctions until they become noise rather than signal. When everyone receives a prize, no prize means anything. When political considerations override merit, the entire framework of recognition collapses into a kind of theatrical ritual, performed for appearances rather than substance.

The essay serves as a timely reminder that symbols matter — and that how institutions choose to use them says a great deal about their actual values, not just the ones they print on ceremonial parchment.