|
|
|
 |
FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794
|
|
|
|
Posted on 01/21/2003 1:29:56 PM PST by Pokey78
The contrast could not be greater. Today's 40th anniversary of the Elysée Treaty between France and Germany has provided a remarkable springboard for the reassertion of Franco-German leadership in the European Union. Tony Blair, on the other hand, appears to have been shuffled sideways, at risk of becoming a spectator as others set the pace in EU affairs.
This is a striking reversal of fortunes. Only a few months ago British diplomats could barely conceal their delight that Paris and Berlin seemed to have lost their capacity to act in concert. Mr Blair, we were told, was filling the breach, pioneering the debate on the future of Europe. Britain's turn at the helm of the EU was nigh.
The decline in British fortunes has been abrupt, its fall from grace palpable everywhere. President Jacques Chirac and Chancellor Gerhard Schröder reached a deal on agricultural spending without even deigning to consult Mr Blair. Last month's agreement, governing Turkey's accession to the EU following a Franco-German proposal, pointedly shunned the timetable pushed by Washington and London.
Romano Prodi, the president of the European Commission, regards London's attachment to the primacy of the nation state in EU decision-making as the greatest threat to his organisation. The EU's smaller member states have also taken fright, regarding many of London's ideas on institutional reform as little more than an attempt by a "directoire" of larger countries to dominate the EU.
There are many reasons for the sudden change in the UK's standing in the EU. Some are self-inflicted. British ministers have a grating habit of overstating their case in EU debates. Gordon Brown is famous for lecturing his counterparts into submission. There has been too much baseless hype that the Convention on the Future of Europe, chaired by Valéry Giscard d'Estaing, is "going Britain's way".
Other reasons are beyond the British Government's control. In particular, the ruthless brilliance with which M. Chirac has moved to capitalise on the German government's weakness to reoccupy the EU's centre stage could not have been foreseen. Last week's Franco-German proposal for a dual presidency of the EU, one representing national governments and the other the European Commission, was only the latest in a succession of proposals shaped by M. Chirac's determination to set the EU agenda.
But there are two more profound reasons for the plunge in Britain's status within the EU that should give Tony Blair real cause for concern. First, there is the euro. Last month, the Portuguese Prime Minister, Jose Durao Barroso, voiced in public what EU heads of government have long whispered in private – why should the UK be granted a leadership role as long as it is unwilling to sign up to one of the central tenets of EU membership? As long as EU leaders believed Tony Blair was merely biding his time before putting the issue to a referendum, there was sufficient goodwill to forgive Britain's procrastination. But, as the Continent looks on with perplexity at the gridlock between the Prime Minister and the Chancellor, fears have deepened that Mr Blair has missed his chance.
And then, most important of all, there is Britain's special relationship with the United States. It is difficult to capture the conflicting reactions which Blair's ostentatious loyalty to George Bush's foreign policy elicits within the rest of the EU.
Admiration, to some extent, that there is a European leader trying to exercise a restraining influence on the US administration's apparent unilateral instincts. Envy, too, at the effortlessness with which the London and Washington establishments communicate with each other. But, above all, a deep suspicion that the gusto with which Mr Blair has aligned himself with Mr Bush demonstrates that the UK's reflex is to choose America over Europe. De Gaulle, it is muttered, was right. British Atlanticism will always stand in the way of a true commitment to Europe.
This poses a fundamental, possibly intractable, challenge to Mr Blair. It is an article of faith to him, as it has been to every British Prime Minister since the last war, that the UK should not have to choose between its affinity with the US and its place in Europe. It is the founding principle upon which British foreign policy has been based for over a generation. But as the EU embarks upon its most dramatic transformation ever – an extensive enlargement accompanied by a recasting of its constitutional arrangements – the British may finally have to choose. EU membership now requires a degree of political commitment which makes it impossible to remain half-in, half-out.
Mr Blair may still harbour ambitions to realign Britain's role within the EU for good. But his own actions, and events, are pushing him in the opposite direction. Ambivalence on the euro, a stubborn allegiance to Washington, and a resurgent Franco-German duo are proving incompatible with Blair's European aspirations. He will need to make painful sacrifices and take greater risks if he truly wishes to anchor the UK at the heart of the EU. He cannot afford to dither much longer. It is time to decide.
The writer is Liberal Democrat MEP for the East Midlands
|
|
|
|
|
FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794
|
|
|
|
The NEW WORLD ORDER that is needed, is one that does not contain the likes of them...
I am ashamed and sorrowfilled that the UK has to live next door to these awful people/nations. We should have insisted at the end of WW2 that these two nations, the germans and the vichys were a mere footnote forever in histoire... they should have been dissolved forever.
There ought to be an outbreak of British Union Jacks throughout the land along with our Stars and Stripes. I know it will be reported in the UK press, and make our allies feel even more appreciated.
1. That remark was awfully insensitive of you.
2. I hope that the Eiffel Tower does NOT fall, because one of these days I plan to wake up early on a Saturday, load up the car with my wife and five kids (while my wife is loading up the car with toys and "snacks"** for the kids) and driving to the Eiffel Tower, and I don't want it falling while I'm on the top of it. (It's about a 3 hr drive to there from here in Lens, Belgium)
** - I'm not sure exactly what she brings for snacks; I think we start out with 5 loaves and two fish, because when I clean up after a trip I usually collect about 12 baskets full of leftovers off the floor of the van)
I think he already has.
Very true, but probably not in the way the author meant.
the UK should not have to choose between its affinity with the US and its place in Europe.
Given a "Europe" devoted to individual rights, free trade, and democracy, there'd be no need for such a choice.
But given the "Europe" we actually have, it's a very real choice.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.