Europe's Next Crisis: Britain Losing Allegiance to the EU

[sysop]

Europe won the Nobel Peace Prize last week, but it comes at a time when the threat of the European Union splitting is considerable. Great Britain is turning away from the EU and the German government is allowing it to do so. In the future, Chancellor Merkel wants to forge ahead with projects London opposes.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/...-a-861294.html

[Trojan Horace]

Whilst the article is essentially correct in its general thrust, it would be wrong to represent this as "Britain's position." The Conservative Party has been split down the middle over Europe for decades with its ageing, retiree, grass roots the most prone to populist opposition. But as a party it can't command more than a third of the electorate's votes. The Liberal-Democratic party, which keeps Cameron in office, with its minority support, is almost completely and enthusiastically Pro-European - and the Labour party is fairly solidly Pro-European, barring some of its leftist rank-and-file, which together with measured attempts not to enrage the minority electorate on the right of the conservative party, tends to make it sound more sceptical than it is in practice. Overall, assuming there were a referendum, it's likely the opinions of the British public wouldn't differ much from those of Germany.

The difficulties of the Euro, through too enthusiastically and too rapidly, allowing economically troubled, economies into the EU, have provided a good whipping boy for the European Project's detractors. Mistakes have undoubtedly been made. However, to call the principle of further closer integration "dead" would be premature. It may sit on the back burner but things change and a week is a long time in politics. Let's see. Ironically it's actually been Britain's economic, structural weaknesses that have precluded it from full participation in the Euro, rather than the ideologues of the Thatcherite tendency.

the EU's biggest detractors have been from fearful editorials in the Us in media outlets like the Wall Street Journal. No prizes, with the dollar perilously in difficulties, why there are those in the US who ever enjoyed the little local difficulties of the Greek default. It would be sage for Der Spiegal not to allow themselves be infected by that position. In the last economic analysis the American consumer votes with their wallet for German products and to say they would love to have a manufacturing base as robust, would be understatement.

[RichardMcC]

Not surprising that we come to this point. The Euro project was a misstep. A great idea which in practice has benefited Germany which put its house in order thanks to Mr Schroeder but not the irresponsible ones who mismanaged their affairs and now have austernity imposed. Now we see the design flaws and propose more centralised control, the UK cannot stomach more loss of sovereignty.
Where does that leave everyone else? Will Germany resist that, without the UK, the French will make the EU more dirigiste, socialised and anti-American? Will we get more Europe without popular support and imposed by stealth. Most member states do not allow citizens a vote on Euopean issues. The few that do get the wrong answers, France and the Netherlands voted against constitutional change. The proposed Treaty was relabelled and voted into law against the will of these voters. Precisely where are we going with ever closer Union is never debated.
Germany can feel comfortable with its economic success but do Germans realise the EU and the Euro have anything to do with it. If they were allowed to vote, what would the outcome be?

[saltedporkpie]

Do this really matter? By which I mean, if the UK voted to leave and the other EU members didn't want such an obstructionalist member anyway then surely 'everyone's a winner'.

Trade, diplomacy and cultural connections will continue as before, and the other members can pursue their dreams of ever greater integration without hindrance.

For long standing historical reasons (both good and bad) the UK has fundamentally different view of the Project. That is not a good thing or a bad thing, it just 'is'.

[Eurasius]

The Concise Oxford Dictionary defines Great Britain as: "England, Wales and Scotland".

I am not sure that the title of the article is strictly correct, and wonder if it should not have read "England Losing Allegiance to the EU". From what I understand of opinions of people from Scotland expressed in the opinion sections of articles in newspapers, people in Scotland are not hostile to Europe or to European people.

On further reflection, I am not even sure the title "England Losing Allegiance to the EU" would have been correct either, since I do not believe England has ever had any allegiance at any time to EU or its prior incarnations. President de Gaulle was surely correct, England is too tied to USA to ever have been considered a valid candidate for membership of the EEC.

Perhaps the most sinister behaviour of England in the period of its membership of the EU was to force EU to accept full membership of Turkey, a country which the Financial Times of London estimated at the time (2004) would have, when eventually admitted to the EU, a population of over 100 million; a Middle Eastern country whose culture is not European, and a country whose immigrants into European countries have proved most difficult to assimilate.

[Willy Waucht]

Quote Overall, assuming there were a referendum, it's likely the opinions of the British public wouldn't differ much from those of Germany. Unquote

This is precisely the problem. If there were to be a EU wide referendum tomorrow how many of the EU paymaster countries would vote to stay in this slightly dented project? I think national politicians would struggle to convince the voters from Germany, France and the UK that they are on the right path. It is more likely to be enough is enough. We are of course discussing the word never to be mentioned in Brussels, Referendum.

In the last UK election the Conservative party polled 36% and they avoided talking about Europe at all. Fast forward two years and polls suggest nearly 50% of the electorate would vote against membership of the EU in a referendum. I leave you to translate how the labour party would adjust their often fluid politics to cover that position.

Do bare in mind that the UK polls are based on the British electorates view on the current position. Would anyone like to forecast their views and attitude to a future EU as forecast in the Spiegel article? Answers on a postcard to 10 Downing Street. London SW1.

Willy Waucht

[chris@drakemarine.co.uk]

Fascinating article and probably an accurate portrayal of the position of the Conservative party and British voters.

But while Brits are clearly out of step with the aspirations of the European political elite, are our wishes really so out of line with the people of the EU ?

The problem with the EU has always been that the Commission, aided and abetted by French and German politicians, has singularly failed to bring the population along with them.

They have frequently sidestepped public opinion and on numerous occasions stooped to dodgy devices and outright trickery to push integration far further than voters would support. We all remember the Irish, French and Dutch being told to vote again until they achieved the "correct" outcome.

The Euro was a classic example of this : In order to work they were told repeatedly that full integration would be necessary, otherwise it would fail.

Because they knew this was unacceptable to voters 10 years ago, they pressed ahead in the hope that they could bring in the necessary integration measures by stealth.

Clearly this policy has backfired spectacularly and national politicians have been derided by the unelected Commission in Brussels for failing to deliver.

But because they have to have at least one eye on public opinion, the politicians simply couldn't agree to the necessary measures.

Even after seeing the mess they have caused, the Commission and most Euroland politicians have failed to learned anything from the crisis :

Merkel knows exactly what needs to be done to save the Euro but she has an election to fight in 2013 and she knows that she simply won't get German voters to agree to put up so much of their own money to subsidise Southern Europe.

All we see are more and more sticking plasters being applied including measures that clearly breach EU law and the German Constitution. Everyone knows Greece can't be saved within the Euro and that probably applies to Portugal and Spain as well. Yet nobody will accept the reality of the situation.

If they are anything, Brits are realistic about what needs to be done and Cameron and Osbourne have both annoyed Merkel by called for Euro Bonds and swift, further integration within the Eurozone.

At the same time, they know that she can't deliver on this and that she isn't going to admit it.

Cameron can't suggest the only other solution, an orderly break up, because Britain would then be accused of causing it. Ultimately this will be the outcome but, as one fund manager said, they will try every possible wrong solution until they are inevitably dragged back to the table, kicking and screaming to make the right one. In the meantime, the European Economy is going nowhere.

Where does this leave the UK ?

European politicians need to understand that Britain cannot join in the Euro integration project even if our politicians wanted to because the British political system is very sensitive to public opinion.

Put simply, no British Government could get away with the devious strokes pulled by Barrosso and his cronies.

Blair tried it over Iraq and paid the price.

[johnsargent1940@gmail.com]

Most Britons would be happy with a loose association of independent European nations engaged in entirely pragmatic concerns such as the development of the single market. Few Britons are happy with the idea of submerging their national identity in a United States of Europe in which the glaring EU democratic deficit would be maintained in much the same form as today (democracy has a very long history in Britain and is deeply engrained in the British population).

If a United States of Europe were to represent a beacon of progress, the British might be interested, but the eurozone, which would presumably form the core of any USE, looks to most of us arthritic and hugely incapable of coping with economic recession, and offers not progress but fossilization – an ageing community, with an economy incapable of rising to the challenges of the world’s newly industrializing countries, and based on a single currency which is patently failing.

The time has come for Britain to go. Staying in the EU makes less and less sense – why hitch your wagon to a falling star? And for the reasons that you outline in your article, the great majority of continental Europeans would be happy to see Britain go. On both “sides”, a British departure would represent a liberation, or at least a perceived one. An amicable divorce beckons. Let’s get on with it.

[celtthedog@hotmail.com]

With the greatest respect to Trojan Horace above, when it comes to euroscepticism, the article is not in fact 'wrong to represent this as "Britain's position."' Irrespective of alleged "splits" in the Tory Party (who actually unified over Europe a decade ago) or the Lib Dem's or Labour Party's more europhile positions, polls have repeatedly shown that the overwhelming majority of Britons are opposed to further politcal integration with Europe (in fact, only 18% of Britons regard themselves as "European").

What we are faced with is the unstoppable force meeting the unmovable object. Most continental Europeans (or at least their elites) believe that Europe needs to become some sort of confederation or federation. Most Britons (and a good portion of their elites) are implacably opposed to British membership of such an entity.

Basically, the Europeans will have their (con)federation; the British will not be part of it. The divorce is going to happen because neither side will concede ground on what they regard as a fundamental principle.

It could be that Britain is making as mistake, as many of the Spiegel's readership -- and Britons like Timothy Garton Ash -- no doubt believe.

But I've never met a Canadian who regrets his nation is not part of the United States of America...

[anthonythompson]

There is an underlying presumption in this and similar articles that the EU embodies some kind of "moral good". From a UK perspective this is bizarre and laughable.

In the UK we see a corrupt organisation that allowed 4.5 billion euros of expenditure to be unaccounted for in 2011 alone, in which MEPs do not have to submit expenses, and EU salaries are tax free. We see an organisation obsessed with control and regulation. We see an organisation that is incapable of adapting to a changing world. We see an evolutionary dead-end.

But most of all we see a contempt and loathing for democracy. It's not just the sidelining of French, Dutch and Irish inconvenient referendum results, or the imposition of, for example, an Italian cabinet in which not a single member has been elected, or indeed of an unelected Greek PM. No, it is much more endemic than that. Take this article: where is the word: "democracy"? It's not there. No where.

The EU and the Euro can only survive by suppressing democracy. This does not seem to matter to EU politicians. More shockingly it does not seem to matter for journalist apologists of the EU, or the jokers in Oslo who awarded that prize to the well-fed bureaucrats in Brussels ahead of unbelievably brave people in dozens of countries around the world who are fighting terrifying regimes. Does it matter to the general people of the EU? It appears not to.

Plato famously hated democracy and his malign - in this area - influence is still thriving throughout mainland Europe. It is not by chance that the EU has been to design to provide a system of government that is incapable of being removed. From a UK perspective it is exactly this careless attitude to democracy is what has led to the rise of dictators in Europe in the past and the wars that followed. In that same past many European peoples have failed to care enough about creating and retaining a system that has given them the ability to remove a government without recourse to bloodshed. So we see the EU as a force for moral evil, not good. For all our many and great shortcomings, that particular failure has not been shared by the British people and we are inordinately proud of it. So if you disregard our steel edged and stubborn love of democracy you do not know us.