The thesis is focusing on EU cultural policies in relation to national cultural policies, more precisely with the Romanian system. One defining difference between those two is that solely EUMS have competence over the composition and guidance of national cultural policies. The EU can only issue Resolutions, Conclusions and Communications with respect to cultural policies, however not Directives. The case study is analyzing the case of "George Enescu" Music Festival. A thick description will show how Romanian cultural policies apply to the organization of the festival and what the outcome is, as well as this event's potential of contributing to the shared sense of cultural values. The conclusion will then expose if the thick description from the case study provides corroboration or refutes the trends from Chapter 1. Briefly, the chapters will follow the subsequent issues to be discussed. The first chapter will seek to find an answer to the question "what is the common ground between European and national levels in the domain of cultural policy?" In the endeavour of doing that a historical development of EU cultural policy will be presented, as well as early actions towards cultural cooperation and contradictory discussions between EUMS for setting a legal framework for the cultural field or not. The chapter concludes with a presentation of the nowadays situation of culture within the EU.For strengthening the article and clarifying its understanding, the principle of subsidiarity was established. Thus, culture being a personal, very national field is under national competence, the principle of subsidiarity assuring EU's non-interference. Still, EU-EUMS discussions take place. This led the analysis to the second chapter where it is questioned what the Romanian cultural policy framework looks like and was the present form drastically influenced after joining the EU? The second part focuses on Romania's relation with the EU, policy aims both intrinsic and extrinsic as well as how is EU cultural policy regarded in Romania. Before entering the EU, Romania expressed its commitment in further developments of cultural policies, thus forcing the national officials to act as quickly as possible. This is an example of how EU can influence a Member State in the field of culture. The elected case study is "George Enescu" Festival which is a Romanian classical music cultural manifestation. Its' first edition was organized in 1958 in Bucharest after three years the Romanian composer, violinist, pianist, conductor and teacher George Enescu died. Right from the start, the character of GEF was both national and international, the international and then European identities being developed. GEF went through difficult times during communism although it never stopped being a high-cultural, elitist oasis. The third chapter is questioning if "George Enescu" Music Festival is seen by the Romanian audience, management and government as being able to contribute to a shared sense of cultural value or even to a common European culture. The reason behind choosing this particular event is because festivals in their cosmopolitan, more elitist or rather popular form translate culture into a shared experience. This type of cosmopolitan festival such as GEF brings together a diverse audience which is making the cultural manifestation an elitist, both European and Romanian experience. Going further, the audience reaches easier the artistic production since music is a universal form of art. This chapter is highlighting the development of the festival from the first edition of it to the most recent one and is exposing the organization of GEF and its outcomes. The fourth and last chapter is asking if the thick description of the case study provides corroboration or refutes the trends from Chapter 1. Thus, conclusions will be draw upon all the statements, analysis and remarks made within the first three chapters.The thesis is focusing on EU cultural policies in relation to national cultural policies, more precisely with the Romanian system. One defining difference between those two is that solely EUMS have competence over the composition and guidance of national cultural policies. The EU can only issue Resolutions, Conclusions and Communications with respect to cultural policies, however not Directives. The case study is analyzing the case of "George Enescu" Music Festival. A thick description will show how Romanian cultural policies apply to the organization of the festival and what the outcome is, as well as this event's potential of contributing to the shared sense of cultural values. The conclusion will then expose if the thick description from the case study provides corroboration or refutes the trends from Chapter 1. Briefly, the chapters will follow the subsequent issues to be discussed. The first chapter will seek to find an answer to the question "what is the common ground between European and national levels in the domain of cultural policy?" In the endeavour of doing that a historical development of EU cultural policy will be presented, as well as early actions towards cultural cooperation and contradictory discussions between EUMS for setting a legal framework for the cultural field or not. The chapter concludes with a presentation of the nowadays situation of culture within the EU.For strengthening the article and clarifying its understanding, the principle of subsidiarity was established. Thus, culture being a personal, very national field is under national competence, the principle of subsidiarity assuring EU's non-interference. Still, EU-EUMS discussions take place. This led the analysis to the second chapter where it is questioned what the Romanian cultural policy framework looks like and was the present form drastically influenced after joining the EU? The second part focuses on Romania's relation with the EU, policy aims both intrinsic and extrinsic as well as how is EU cultural policy regarded in Romania. Before entering the EU, Romania expressed its commitment in further developments of cultural policies, thus forcing the national officials to act as quickly as possible. This is an example of how EU can influence a Member State in the field of culture. The elected case study is "George Enescu" Festival which is a Romanian classical music cultural manifestation. Its' first edition was organized in 1958 in Bucharest after three years the Romanian composer, violinist, pianist, conductor and teacher George Enescu died. Right from the start, the character of GEF was both national and international, the international and then European identities being developed. GEF went through difficult times during communism although it never stopped being a high-cultural, elitist oasis. The third chapter is questioning if "George Enescu" Music Festival is seen by the Romanian audience, management and government as being able to contribute to a shared sense of cultural value or even to a common European culture. The reason behind choosing this particular event is because festivals in their cosmopolitan, more elitist or rather popular form translate culture into a shared experience. This type of cosmopolitan festival such as GEF brings together a diverse audience which is making the cultural manifestation an elitist, both European and Romanian experience. Going further, the audience reaches easier the artistic production since music is a universal form of art. This chapter is highlighting the development of the festival from the first edition of it to the most recent one and is exposing the organization of GEF and its outcomes. The fourth and last chapter is asking if the thick description of the case study provides corroboration or refutes the trends from Chapter 1. Thus, conclusions will be draw upon all the statements, analysis and remarks made within the first three chapters.