Next Referendum: inside Europe, or out?
Fintan asked yesterday, and Mary Lou replied today (subs needed). She won’t be going to renegotiate a new treaty for the Republic with Europe. But she has a drawn up a list that’s more remarkable for its length than its detail. I won’t comment on them directly, other than to note that since the Republic has already assented to the change from the first thing on the list (all countries to retain a Commissioner) in the Nice Treaty, it is unlikely that any Irish government will make headway on that particular aspect.
• The retention of a permanent commissioner for all member states;• The retention of the Nice Treaty formulae for qualified majority voting;
• The removal of all eight self-amending articles including the simplified revision procedure in Article 48;
• The removal of Article 46a giving the EU a single legal personality;
• A strengthened protocol on the role of member state parliaments;
• A significantly expanded protocol on the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality including the aims and values of the EU;
• Substantial amendments to aspects of the Common Foreign and Security Policy;
• Substantial amendments to the section of Common Defence and Security Policy;
• A new protocol on neutrality;
• A strengthened social clause;
• A substantially revised protocol on vital public services;
• Amendments to articles dealing with public services and state aid;
• The inclusion of the European Trade Union Confederation Social Progress Clause to protect workers’ rights;
• A protocol on Irish tax sovereignty;
• Substantial amendments on Article 188 dealing with international trade agreements including a cast-iron veto on mixed World Trade Organisation agreements;
• A new protocol ending Ireland’s participation in the European Atomic Energy Community;
• A series of amendments to Articles 10 and 188 promoting the needs of the developing world in the context of international trade.
She concludes:
Politics is the art of the possible. When entering any negotiation one must be both ambitious and realistic. Crucially, you must gather around you as much support as you can, both domestically and in other member states, to secure the most advantageous outcome.
Fair enough. Although, there is a touch of the back seat driver about all of this, since Sinn Fein won’t have any responsibility for pulling it off. It’s one of the few blessings of being in opposition.
However Wolfgang Munchau had a fascinating take on the possible outworkings of the current situation:
The No vote leaves the country with exactly two alternatives. One is a humiliating U-turn, consisting of a Yes vote in a second referendum without a material change of circumstances. The other is that Ireland could lose its full EU membership if the second referendum produces another No victory.
At the time I read it was sceptical of that second clause. But as Bridget Laffan notes in today’s Irish Times that possibility is real enough. She outlines two possible scenarios. The first a referendum, which she rules out in the short term at least. The second is a more detailed explanation of the scenario Munchau has in mind if all the other states ratify the treaty. In which case:
…the treaty will apply to 26 states with a bilateral treaty setting out Ireland’s relations to the 26. Just how this will be accomplished is far from clear but the Union has long experience of accommodating those states that want or need special arrangements.
The existing Union is replete with “opt-in” and “opt-out” clauses. This would deliver Ireland into a second tier of EU engagement, something that was always regarded as against our essential interests.
The other member states will make every effort to accommodate Ireland’s needs and concerns but there are limits to accommodation as the EU is a partnership of 27 states and the needs of one will never be allowed trump the needs of the Union.
That’s the brick wall this SF strategy (where the government minded to be guided by it) would likely hit. Of course it depends on what the deal breakers are. If its ‘the removal of all eight self-amending articles including the simplified revision procedure in Article 48′, you begin to sense just how far outside the EU internal machine a future Irish government is likely find itself under new associate membership. And that’s only if it can win another referendum on the renewed basis.
Munchau has an alternative though:
An alternative would be a referendum with a differently worded question, such as: “Do you want to remain in the EU on the basis of the Lisbon treaty?” Of course, this bundles two questions many people would like to answer separately. Yes, stay in the EU, No to Lisbon. But folding the two into a single question is politically more honest because it is Ireland’s only real-world choice.
Stark? Yes. Realistic? Undeniably so. When the warm glow fades after the NO vote of last Thursday, the people of the Republic may soon discover that a national mandate brings with it some tough (possibly very lonely) choices.
Dave ‘
‘You, however, assume that Europe is already a nation state and’
News to me . The EU is a union of member states and can never be a ‘nation ‘ state for it is made up of 26 different nations . Would you call the USA a ‘nation ‘ state or a federal republic ?
‘You believe (wrongly) that membership of the EU is in Ireland’s national interest, and I hold that it is detrimental to Ireland’s national interest.’
The overall political and economic history of Ireland 1973 through 2008 is enough evidence for me that membership of the EU has been and will continue to be in Ireland’s national interest .
‘we have more millionaires per capita than any other country other than Japan’
So? I don’t believe that was the case between 1800 and 1922 nor for that matter between 1922 and 1973 . Access to the EU and through the EU to global markets made that possible. Having a truly democratic society is about more than creating ‘millioniares’ . To be a truly democratic society means having equal access to health care and education for all classes in societyand not just the rich. Having a ‘free market’ free for all with the rich getting richer while the middle and working classes become steadily poorer in relative terms will only lead to political instability and eventually bloody revolution . Ireland will/would be no exception .
The current political debate in the USA is bringing that particular issue i.e the increasing divide between the have lots and have nots into greater focus.
‘and that membership of the EU (in any form) will only serve to limit our potential as a nation state rather than advance ‘
Now I’m as much of a fan of Charles Stewart Parnell as the next man and while respecting Parnells work on trying to repeal Home Rule and bring self government to Ireland I think we have to be realistic about Ireland’s potential . We are not Japan nor China nor India nor for that matter Switzerland . And although some of us may aspire to a UI I doubt if there are any who aspire to ‘marching ‘ or advancing onto our neighbouring island
‘I hold that we are not equals but superiors’
Oh you do do you ? Irland uber alles then ?
What next ? We have an edge in some fiscal corporate taxation areas and the internet age has made us less isolated but it still costs more to truck goods from Ireland to Poland than from Germany to Poland .
‘You go further and wish Ireland to become a region of a federal EU’
If there is to be a Federal Europe at some point in the future then it will be because the nation states of the EU will accept that that is the best way for the separate European nations to protect their interests in a world where the balance of economic power is once again shifting east to China and the East that ‘balance ‘ having been borrowed by the European imperial nation states and their main Colonial derivative the USA for the past 250 ? years or so . In that future world economic context Ireland’s only ‘bargaining’ chip will be as a member of a Federal EU. Ireland should of course exploit it’s EU membership as a bridge between the EU and the USA .
‘and I say over my dead body.’
Well you would -’superior people’ are into dead bodies however it’s mostly other people’s
What we have learned from recent european history is that when the extreme left and extreme right get together then ‘dead bodies’ have a tendency to multiply . Ask any Pole how the Soviet- German Non Agression Pact worked out for them (the Poles ) in 1938/39 ?
So when you take delight in enjoying the fruits of a Libertas /SF / Neo Nazi European racist short term ‘unity ‘ you should be glad that it’s Ireland 2008 you live in and not Warsaw in 1939 .
Dave ,
‘the Irish people have no intention of trading one form of colonisation for another.
I would’nt doubt it if that’s what was being offered but it’s not . We Irish had no choice in the earlier half colonisation – I say half for in truth the English never put their mind to a full colonisation for had they done so there would be no Ireland. For the growing English Empire – Scotland , Ireland and Wales were backdoors to England which needed to be militarily and economically ‘neutralised’ until such time as they ‘willingly ‘ Scotland in 1707 and Ireland in 1801 became part of Brittania Incorporated. Wales being geographically less remote was crushed into ‘fealty’ (no pun intended Mick if you read this ) in the 14th century .
‘Success was achieved under the principle of self-determination. ‘
That it was. But at what cost ? For a long period 1922 to the mid 1960′s what you call ‘success’ resulted in the emigration of almost one million people and a cultural, political and economic stagnation, that made Ireland the backwater of western europe . It was only through our opening up to the world through the Anglo Irish Free Trade Agreement and membership of the EU that enabled this country to use it’s ‘self determination’ in a manner which had a positive impact on the lives of most of the people in this country .
You are mistaking a tool for the end product . Self determination is a means to an end – not an end in itself once achieved .
By your logic Zimbabwe should be enjoying the fruits of it’s hard won right to self determination ? But for some odd reasons that does not appear to be the case ?
dave
‘re your post no 24 on Jun 21, 2008 @ 04:18 AM’
‘Greenflag, first of all, I apologise for the sarcastic comment ‘
Let him who is without sarcasm throw the first stone
I’m fully aware of how and why the EU began no need for the history lesson. I’m aware of all the issues you refer to in this post and I share some of your views.
We live in a ‘world ‘ very different from that of post war Europe or the Europe of 1956 or indeed the Europe of the mid 1980′s. The EU’s member states as individual states will have increasingly less influence over world trade and will have to pool their resources to be able to protect their interests . Whether this pooling becomes a matter of what you call inter governmental voluntary cooperation or a federal arrangement seems to be your main concern .
The USA ‘States’ have individual state rights in many matters but there are also Federal Laws which overide State laws in certain areas . The people of Ohio do not alone formulate USA foreign policy nor do Texans impose their state taxes on other states -Yet all americans vote for the President and Federal government . Many americans would make the point that the USA is not a nation state being composed of originally many nations . What they have which Europe does not have is a short history and just one or two ‘civil ‘ wars on their own soil excluding the Indian wars .
An EU Federal Republic is IMO a long way away and this Lisbon Treaty was intende to improve the efficiency of decision making throughout it’s institutions and nothing else .
‘While there is no reason to fear war within Europe’
Europeans would have a different perspective given their history over the past millenia . We recently had several wars within the former Yugoslavia which you may have forgotten . At least within the EU membership ‘war’ against a fellow member state is now inconceivable. Countries which fail to hold free and fair elections are not admittted to the union.
‘ there is solid reason to predict that EU integration will end in separatist terrorism and civil war between those who are loyal to their national identity and those who assumed the artificially engineered national identity of European.’
What is this solid reason? Any actual evidence other than a gut feel ? Is British an ‘artifically engineered national identity ‘ or was it imposed militarily ? At least we the people had a vote re joing the EU . If you can still be British and a Scot or British and Welsh or British and Irish why not top the mix off with European ?
Europe like Britain will always be a combination of nation states regardless of whether it’s future political orientation will be federal or not . The best safeguard for those individual ‘nation ‘ states in the EU is to be part of a combination in which the smaller states together outnumber the largest ones both in absolute numbers and in total population.