February 2, 2008
EDITORIAL OPINION: Taoiseach sees Opposition to Lisbon as EU Pullout Drive
Posted by eastwesteurope08 under Guilt by Association argument, Ireland: Referendum, Ratification Process, Treaty of Lisbon | Tags: Ahern, Fianna Fail, Taoiseach |Taoiseach Bertie Ahern has highlighted the long-running anti-EU stance of some groups opposing the Lisbon Treaty. He singled out those whose goal was always to get Ireland out of the Union altogether and challenged them to repeat this now. Mr Ahern questioned the possibility that opposition to the Treaty could be compatible with support for Europe.
My last pro-EU campaign was for the Single European Act. And, I will admit, it was actually under the Fianna Fail banner. I trudged the streets of South Dublin in that cause. I have no regrets.
There may well be others who campaigned for a YES vote in even more recent referenda. And there are natural Fianna Fail and Fine Gael supporters who want a very different pattern of EU evolution.
You do not have to be a Sinn Feiner, anti-capitalist, anti-Western or even anti-EU to have serious problems with both the Lisbon Treaty and the process by which it is being imposed on Europeans.
In this latter connection, the Taoiseach dismissed a concern for the lack of democracy elsewhere in Europe, insisting that Irish voters should look at the cost-benefit calculation here. This site will do such an analysis later. But we also have an opportunity to speak for those denied referenda elsewhere. This is in our long-term interest too. If the ditching of referenda is indicative of how European politicians view the peoples of Europe, it will not be long before some legal technicality is found to enable our Government to impose new EU changes without a popular vote. Recent court judgments requiring referenda are fine so long as this technicality remains undiscovered. A shock NO vote, on the other hand, would signal , in no uncertain terms, that decisions on expanding the power of the EU are not simply another funny little game for well-paid lawyers and smug politicians.
February 5, 2008 at 12:11 pm
Give it a NO!
The Irish republic is the only out of 27 EU member states where the Lisbon treaty, the for-mer EU treaty, that was rejected by the French and Dutch in 2005, is to be confronted with a referendum. Because of this, the Irish people have an historic responsibility with regard to influence on the future.
There is no doubt that the Lisbon-treaty is a benefit for the big EU member states. Maybe that’s why the French government has changed the French constitution so the parliament can approve the treaty. It should make any one very suspicious.
The Lisbon-treaty means more EU control and less national democracy and decision mak-ing: centralisation, instead of national government. Brussels will se the order of the day. Also with regard to military and security politics. The EU wants to compete with the USA. Can YOU imagine two hegemonic superpowers? No, that could mean World War Three be-cause Russia and china becomes afraid!
If the world is to be more peaceful, a stronger UN, and the countries of the world should solve the problems together, vote NO to the Lisbon treaty.
Do it for the present generations, the climate, nature, world peace, democracy, and the gen-erations to come. If they are to have a god life, the problems must be solved by the UN, not the USA and the EU. That means more trouble.
______
[EASTWESTEUROPE RESPONDS]
__________
Thanks for the contribution, Torben.
the ppint about the Irish electorate having a unique opportunity to shape the evolution of Europe is a strong one. That should be placed alongside any self-interested calculation.
I will blog later on the EU’s foreign policy ambitions.
It is unlikely that an EU-US confrontation would lead to anything as serious as war. However, it would be foolish for Europeans to invest time and effort into challenging U.S. power just for the sake of the challenge. This, of course, is how French Gaullists and some German Social Democrats want things to develop. Instead, the EU should judge international issues on their merits. There may be areas where Europe can lead. But there are also areas where the effort to challenge Washington would be so great as to be counter-productive.
I am not sure that the UN is the most effective forum for managing all the big global or regional issues. But, even if we disagree there, there are enough intergovernmental organizations already to address most issues, if only there was the political will. An ambitious and assertive European power will not be a constructive addition to the pie. Some could use NATO. Others would use OSCE or bilateral arrangements with the U.S. European states can cooperate on specific security or foreign policy missions as the need arises. You would clearly use the UN or NGOs. Whichever way you look at it, there is no need for a permanent European foreign policy machine.
Thanks for the entry - and do contribute again.