The EU crises of the 2010s blindsided Europe’s political leaders and highlighted the EU’s shortcomings and deep unpopularity. By politicizing the EU, the crises threw into disarray the normally rather depoliticized, technocratic environment of EU policymaking. There is now a consensus among scholars that European integration has become increasingly politicized.1 However politicization is defined and measured, the Eurozone crisis has finally driven home the fact that decisions made at the EU level are not merely technical and that they have major political repercussions. Yet this intense politicization may appear dangerous for the EU, insofar as the European Union embodies “a system of multi-level governance which facilitates social interaction across national boundaries, increases immigration and undermines national sovereignty.”2 As politicization engages touchy issues of national sovereignty, anti-EU backlashes become more likely. And indeed, in view of increasingly strident conflict, observers often diagnosed near-paralysis and even a danger of outright collapse for the European Union. The politicization of the Eurozone crisis seemed especially threatening because it reflected deep conflicts among Member States.3 The increasing recourse to a rhetoric of sovereignty manifested sharply divergent state goals. The states in need of EU financing claimed a sovereign right to decide on their economic policies, whereas creditor states and EU officials have insisted that loan recipients should accept temporary limitations to their sovereignty as the price to pay for better Eurozone governance.