Special Report
Now That Ireland Has Caved
The Lisbon Treaty brigade will still have to wait until the fat (Czech) lady sings — and watch out if David Cameron becomes Prime Minister.
In a contest watched closely in Europe but largely ignored in America, the Irish voted on Friday to approve the Lisbon Treaty. The European establishment is celebrating what is supposed to become a stronger European Union.
But the fat (Czech) lady has yet to sing.
Five years ago members of the EU advanced a continental constitution to create a consolidated government in Brussels, with a president and foreign minister, increased “competencies,” or responsibilities, for the EU, and fewer national vetoes over other issues. But in 2005 the Dutch and French peoples voted no.
After that democratic debacle, the Eurocratic elite wheeled out a slightly revised contitution in the form of a treaty requiring only parliamentary approval. Although polls indicated that majorities in every EU member desired to vote on the treaty, only Ireland (by its constitution) required a popular ballot. In June 2008 the Irish shocked the European establishment by rejecting the accord.
The EU elite reacted predictably by closing ranks and scheming to overturn the popular will. The point is not that it is necessarily wrong to create something closer to a European nation state. (Personally, I believe Europeans are risking their liberties for little practical benefit, but it is their decision to make.) However, as Larry Siedentop, author of Democracy in Europe, notes: “the EU seems blind to a central insight of liberal democratic thought — that the means of reaching public decisions are just as important as the ends.”
Last month European Commission president Jose Manuel Barroso claimed “We respect the vote of the Irish people,” but if so he was the only person in Brussels to do so. Some Eurocrats proposed to toss Dublin out of the EU or at least consign it to second-class status. Most demanded that the Irish vote again — and get it right this time.
The anger over the democratic process was palpable: How dare the Irish thwart the will of 500 million Europeans, not that any of the other 495 million had been allowed to express that will at the polls? Declan Ganley, head of the group Libertas, wrote: “we Irish behaved badly, and were therefore required as a matter of course to vote again. Nearly every EU leader agrees with this. Their own people must not vote, but the Irish must vote twice.”
So the Irish held another referendum on October 2. Treaty advocates played on concern over the economy — Ireland was hit particularly hard by the financial collapse — claiming that another no vote would somehow distance Ireland from the continent. Yet France and the Netherlands faced no such punishment after voting no four years ago. In fact, Lisbon is irrelevant to European economic cooperation.
The other EU members also promised future (and unenforceable) treaty changes to address Irish concerns. Moreover, the Irish government, EU officials, and politically oriented businesses ran a concerted and well-funded pro-campaign against a weakened opposition. The result was a solid yes.
That would seem to resolve the issue. Except for one person: Czech President Vaclav Klaus.
Both Klaus and Polish President Lech Kaczynski held off signing the treaties, a necessary constitutional step after parliamentary ratification. Notes Jan Techau of the German Council of Foreign Relations, the two “are lone riders who are not easily influenced by external factors.” Kaczynski promised to sign if the Irish said no. Klaus, a confirmed skeptic of consolidating power in Brussels, did not.
The latter’s refusal has led to a myriad of threats from Czech and EU treaty advocates. French President Nicolas Sarkozy declared that “It will be necessary to draw the consequences,” whatever that means, from continued Czech resistance.
But the independent Klaus, who spent years resisting Czechoslovakia’s communist government, seems unlikely to cave. In fact, Czech politicians are uncomfortable pressing him. Explains Stefan Fule, the Czech Minister for European Affairs: “The government prefers negotiation and we will continue negotiating with Mr. President.”
Moreover, Klaus now has a strong justification for holding back. Seventeen Czech senators have challenged the Lisbon Treaty before the nation’s constitutional court.
Most observers expect a positive verdict. Earlier this year the court upheld the treaty in a similar challenge. But the ruling could take months. And it is possible that the Czech court will follow its German counterpart in requiring the parliament to make legal changes in the treaty’s application to satisfy the constitution. That process would add more time.
About the Author
Doug Bandow is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute. A former Special Assistant to President Ronald Reagan, he is the author and editor of several books, including The Politics of Plunder: Misgovernment in Washington (Transaction).
Letter to the Editor View all comments (36) | Leave a comment
Related Articles
More Articles by Doug Bandow
More Articles From Special Report
http://spectator.org/archives/2009/10/05/now-that-ireland-has-caved
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Pingback| 10.5.09 @ 7:22AM
Doug Bandow » Blog Archive » The Irish Surrender: What Next for Europe? links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Sean in Ireland| 10.5.09 @ 8:35AM
God, if I here one more American Conservative witter on against the EU my head will explode. As a Conservative, the only rational position on Europe is to support it. That's why all European conservative parties support it and are usually it's strongest supporters. Bar one, the narcissistic British Tories who dream of the days when they had the biggest dick and could piss on everyone else. The only other people on the right who oppose it are head-bangers like Le Pen, Haider, Wilders ect.
The EU is an institution which promotes free trade, has a good currency(healthier than the dollar) underpinned by borrowing limit of 3% of GDP and has rules against big governement competition stifling subsidies and protections. It's been a great help in cracking down on unions and controlling the borders too.
So boys, ignore the idiot British Tories(who actually brought the UK into the union) and get your talking points from the 26 other conservative parties in Europe.
PS. The Lisbon treaty was not defeated in Ireland for conservative reasons, it was defeated because of a torrent of lies and disinformation. There were two main groups on the right who opposed it, neither were very big, or had any members of parliament both had non-Irish funding and were filled with crooks and cranks(the two mainline conservative parties who have 127 out of 166 seats of whom one, Fianna Fáil, I am a member supported the treaty). The Lisbon treaty was to me, in a phrase, about cutting red tape, that's what I call conservative.
Tim| 10.5.09 @ 10:20AM
I'm sure that the EU will be better masters than the English.
Etiquette Man| 10.5.09 @ 10:39AM
Lost in Translation:
In Europe, Sarkozy is a conservative. Here, he would be a blue-dog Democrat (at best).
In Europe, Berlusconi is a conservative. Here, the till-emptying, media-stifling (and comely-lass-stiffing) septuagenarian comes across as a spliced-DNA hybrid of Huey Long and Bill Clinton (both Democrats).
In Europe, Frau Angie is a conservative. Here, she would be a left-of-center version of Hillary! Clinton.
The choice in Europe (and increasingly here, as well) is between those who think that the government should control 70% of your life, versus those who think it should control 90% of your life.
Thus is much lost in translation.
Cordially,
EM
P.S. If you're really afraid of your head's exploding due to Eurobashing conservatives, try HuffPo or DailyKos. You may feel more at home there.
Kevin, Meath| 10.5.09 @ 11:47AM
On the whole your point is correct, trying to take 'labels' from one country to another can be misleading, (republican means you believe in the rule by the people, there's a 'republican' party in the UK, it wants to abolish the monarchy. Democrate means you believe in democracy.)
Sarkozy is French their political parties are different to everyone elses, Berlusconi well he is just mad and seemingly very popular in Italy.
The most conservative countries in Europe are Britain and Ireland. Britain has the 'stalinist NHS' and a state broadcaster, the BBC ( who probably produce the best TV in europe). If you call someone a liberal in the UK it wouldn't be viewed as an insult, in fact most British like to think that they are a bit liberal. Winston Churchill was in the 'Liberal' party for a time ,although many would say Churchill was always in the one party - his own.
i often read on this and other sites Obama called a 'Nazi', ye right. Now the BNP they are 'Nazis'.
John| 10.5.09 @ 1:54PM
Sean, Fianna Fail a Conservative Party? Please do not mislead those outside Ireland with such rubbish. Fianna Fail is a populist party, for whom loyalty to the party comes first (as very recently stated by Brian Cowen) with an overarching desire to be in power. I do not think the construction of social partnership, massive expansion over the past decade of the welfare state and their foremost leader of the past fifteen years who referred to himself as a socialist are the hallmarks of a 'conservative party'.
You have shown yourself however to be an exemplary follower of your party, by imitating their deceitful polemics against the Lisbon Treay opposition through spiteful vitriol and lies in order to distract from the truth. From my travels around the country in the run up to the referendum, I observed most 'Yes' posters beseeching us to remain in Europe etc! I am sorry but it was not a refendum on whether we wanted in or out of the EU, but on an International Treaty, the terms of which involve a transfer of powers out of our hands - how dare you demonise those who would seek to dispute the dilution of our hard won sovereignity.
In Ireland, lamently we have no strong left/right parties. Instead we are left with the relics of a civil war divide - Fianna Fail (power at all costs) and Fine Gael (with slightly better credentials towards been conservative) - which continue to bedevil and impoverish our nation with their parocialism and mediocrity.
To finish - I have never heard of Fianna Fail refer to themselves as a conservative party, only ever as the 'Republican Party' - the irony!
Kevin, Meath| 10.5.09 @ 2:49PM
Dear John,
(always wanted to start a comment with that sorry) you forgot to mention that the Fianna Fail party leader and Taoiseach (Prime Minister) was asked by a a planning Tribunal to explain unaccounted for payments into his bank account he answered 'that he'd won it on the horses' and the 'complex/confusing' nature of his finnances was because he didn't really understand such complex issues. a litte worrying considering he had also been minister for finnance and was a trained accountant.
The 'Yes' side did desend into fear tactics, sound bites etc but so did the 'No' side eg if you say yes the EU will introduce the conscription of children into an EU army!
Its exactly the sort of name calling that other countries worry would happen if they had vote on the treaty. You might answer thats democracy and you would be right. What did Churchill say about democracy, something like 'Bloody silly way to run a country -- but better than all the alternatives'.
Kevin, Meath| 10.5.09 @ 9:41AM
One of the main problems of the EU is all countries had the veto, trying to get all 27 different countries with very different political outlooks, historic conflicts and sheer bloody mindedness in some cases to agree on every decision no matter how small is a nightmare. The treaty is an attempt to make the EU more efficient, more democratic and simply work better so some majority vote issues are introduced.
One of the main features of the 'No' camp was that Ireland would be forced to abondon its traditional neutrality as countries are required to aid another EU member if they are attacked and to maintain an effective armed forces. The EU insisted that Irelands Neutrality would not be compromised. I would have thought most in the USA would have agreed with a country being forced to take at least some responsibility for its own defence, especially as Ireland expects the UK/USA to provide sea and air defence.
Cameron doesn't particularly want to run a referendum, they are very rare in British politics, because if he does he may well get an anti europe vote and that will put him in a difficult position with Britains main trading partners. He will also fear supplying those lovely people in the BNP fuel for more xenophobic rants and even allow them a higher and respectable public profile. They are all ready to be given air time by the BBC because they have 2 MEP's.
jd| 10.5.09 @ 1:11PM
Your comment that the treaty is an attempt to make the EU more efficient, more democratic and simply work better sounds good in theory. In talking with my husband's relatives in Belgium, things are not more democratic and the bureaucracy on everything is unbelievable. Don't know how you can convince me, a conservative in the US, that it works better. Like you mentioned, party labels mean different things in different countries. I would also argue that the definition of "democracy" means something different between the US and European countries as well.
JAH666| 10.5.09 @ 10:44AM
If Doug Bandow has upset readers of American Spectator with his analysis, well, were not there, you folks are. The effort to form a continent-wide government from so many countries with so many different outlooks and national agendas seemed a very daunting task when first proposed. These latest developements show that the peoples of Europe still have many difficult days ahead of them before all is settled. Americans can only wish all those involved good luck. This is the biggest governmental change to be proposed on your continent (probably ever) and there are bound to be many, many roadblocks and compromises yet to come. Hang in there euros, and don't give up your freedoms just to get consensus.
E Pluribus Unum
S.L. Toddard| 10.5.09 @ 10:55AM
I find it tragic that the Irish would vote in favor of handing that sovereignty they fought so long and so hard for to European bureaucrats.
Son Of Sam | 10.5.09 @ 11:44AM
I couldn't agree any more strongly; what's more, I take the view that any union which is achieved without consulting the people must in the end be an undemocratic one. What's the point of achieving unity at the expense of liberty?
stand strong until freedom dawns
Son Of Sam
http://www.samadamssos.bravehost.com
JP| 10.5.09 @ 12:56PM
Sean,
As it stands, Europe is in the early stages of decay. All across Europe the populations are becoming older, young people with the means are emigrating, and the only option available to most national parliments is to import large islamic minorities that overall do not assimulate. On the contrary, it is the EU cities that are assimulating to larger and larger minorities diktats.
You do have a point concerning the US, its finances, and the dollar. But I might add that since 1988, the US has more and more been morphing into some EU style social insurance state. Spending, large defecits, increased regulations concerning health care, finance, the enviorment and labor have been the main stay of the US since George H W Bush took office in 1989. But, the US is not Europe (at least not yet), and there remains a rather large minority (or as some suggest a majority) who prize freedom over comfort, liberty over equality (we'd rather have the equality of means than the equality of results), and we never totally bought into entitlements such as social security and Medicare.
Ireland, in the throes of a severe financial crisis is doing the opposite; it is going for short term comforts over long term liberty. As the late Gerald Ford once quipped, "A government that can give its people everything can also take everything." Including one's freedom. The EU is a very complex set of unelected, permanent bureaucracies that set "trans-national standards" from everything to schools to the size of shoes. Once in, it is almost impossible to get out. And with the continent being Islmafied, I would be very worried. One day, Muslim clerics holding permanent offices within the EU bureaucracy will be setting new "standards". One that day comes, an Irish family would rather be living in some dusty isolated corner of West Texas than in County Cork. In West Texas he will be free.
jd| 10.5.09 @ 2:57PM
Well said!
Sean in Ireland| 10.7.09 @ 6:05PM
I agree whole-heartedly that Europe is in deep long term trouble but I don't believe that the EU is a cause or symptom of this. The EU is serving as the same force as Christianity did in the Late Roman Empire; holding together something which should have collapsed long ago. In the EU I am fairly confident that the days of double-digit CPI are gone and as a citizen of a small country I see the EU as a countervailing pressure to the desire to cartelise the economy among the politicall connected as happened for much of the pre-EU period. The thesis that the EU is conservative is by no means a categorical imperative, but is much more a friend than foe.
S.L. Toddard| 10.5.09 @ 1:04PM
I'd ask Mr. Bandow (as well as Son of Sam and Dr. Phillips, if he's around) how they feel about the idea of the Anglosphere and Bennet's policy prescriptions with regards to it:
http://www.pattern.com/bennett.....rimer.html
For any conservative concerned with conserving, maintaining and cultivating our American culture (and by definition every "conservative" is), I cannot recommend highly enough that you read that primer. I am not sure I agree with all of Bennet's recommendations, but surely conservatives must recognize the significance of the Anglosphere to world and American history, and the common link we share with the other nations of the Anglosphere. More so than the somewhat amorphous "West", America is foremost part of the Anglosphere, and it is in the Anglosphere first that any supra-national affection should reside.
HD| 10.5.09 @ 6:57PM
The EU is likely doomed to failure simply because it is an artificial construct. The member nations share no common language and it's unlikely that this could be forced on them by fiat. Also, the Euro, while doing well at the moment, could serve to hamstring the members that now see capitalism, instead of socialism, as the way forward. These intrepid Europeans could find themselves subsidizing nations with less will to strike out on the journey to prosperity. In any case, the common currency holds down nations that see a future in having a strong economy, which the European Parliament will undoubtedly work toward redistributing to lazier member states. We have yet to see what the actual benefits to the citizens of EU members are, although the imagined benefits are trumpeted loud and long.
joseph mailander | 10.6.09 @ 1:33PM
"George," I had an even less charitable thought when I saw that damn Malkin popup. Here's this challenging, rigorously researched and fairly balanced article, and it's fronted by a pop-up from one of the most reactionary clowns in American media. Please, AmSpec, if you want to engage serious issues, get rid of the clown endorsement.
California Is A Dream| 10.6.09 @ 3:12PM
The English should never under any circumstances join with the EU or any other transnational organization. They should remain the independent people they have always been, viewing the Continent as it always has been...a source of turmoil and warfare. The Czech President is to be commended as one of the only free thinkers who sees the world realistically and practically, not caught up in the dreams of the left.
Pingback| 10.6.09 @ 4:39PM
Twitter Trackbacks for The American Spectator : Now That Ireland Has Caved [spectato links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
www.us-bapeoutlet.com | 4.3.10 @ 10:38PM
www.us-bapeoutlet.com