To be smashed by sceptics or to lose political power. For the EU there is no emergency exit, but only lose-lose formula
by Emanuele Bonini
Whatever will happen Europe can't win its game. Blocked in the grip of Eurosceptics and anti-integration forces, the European Union can't do nothing but survive. The choice of accept the UK requests is therefore the lesser evil, which is not good by definition. One of the conditions put on the table by prime minister David Cameron is the possibility to avoid further integration. This is the end of any wish for all those who have been asking the United States of Europe. Letting go the United Kingdom away would open the door to unpredictable scenarios and unexplored situations, and the mild recovery of the European Union could be delete in a while. But on the other hand no further political integration means have a the opposite of a single federal project, so the European Union will be never a Union. The EU is denying itself, institutionalizing a division. There will be a Union of 19 Member States (all those with the single currency) plus all those who will like joining in the future. Europe has already been beaten, in the sense it can't win. What has been proposed to Europe is a lose-lose formula, where the obliged (even forced?) decision will be presented as the a victory for everybody.
It has been said all national delegations are coming to Brussels with a «war room of layers», in order to evaluate the Treaties in the most extensive way possible to have those interpretations needed to answer the British demands. What it has not been said is there is also another war room composed by another special army of experts in charge of making a «wording work» to pack a masterpiece of dialectic whose only purpose is giving the idea everything is OK and will be in the future, too. This is something to agree with. Saying the European Union come to the terminus would be not an easy task, but would be going on with a mutilated Union? The answer comes by its own. The United Kingdom asked to have enshrined the principles of no further union and more power to national Parliaments. The idea of a political union goes right in the opposite direction, that of transfer of sovereignty to the EU institutions. Asking for making irreversible a stop in such a transfer is making irreversible the stop of the European project, with all that it means.
Whatever will happen Europe can't win its game. Blocked in the grip of Eurosceptics and anti-integration forces, the European Union can't do nothing but survive. The choice of accept the UK requests is therefore the lesser evil, which is not good by definition. One of the conditions put on the table by prime minister David Cameron is the possibility to avoid further integration. This is the end of any wish for all those who have been asking the United States of Europe. Letting go the United Kingdom away would open the door to unpredictable scenarios and unexplored situations, and the mild recovery of the European Union could be delete in a while. But on the other hand no further political integration means have a the opposite of a single federal project, so the European Union will be never a Union. The EU is denying itself, institutionalizing a division. There will be a Union of 19 Member States (all those with the single currency) plus all those who will like joining in the future. Europe has already been beaten, in the sense it can't win. What has been proposed to Europe is a lose-lose formula, where the obliged (even forced?) decision will be presented as the a victory for everybody.
It has been said all national delegations are coming to Brussels with a «war room of layers», in order to evaluate the Treaties in the most extensive way possible to have those interpretations needed to answer the British demands. What it has not been said is there is also another war room composed by another special army of experts in charge of making a «wording work» to pack a masterpiece of dialectic whose only purpose is giving the idea everything is OK and will be in the future, too. This is something to agree with. Saying the European Union come to the terminus would be not an easy task, but would be going on with a mutilated Union? The answer comes by its own. The United Kingdom asked to have enshrined the principles of no further union and more power to national Parliaments. The idea of a political union goes right in the opposite direction, that of transfer of sovereignty to the EU institutions. Asking for making irreversible a stop in such a transfer is making irreversible the stop of the European project, with all that it means.
No comments:
Post a Comment