Politics: EU Constitution - A United States of Europe?
On Sunday the French referendum on the EU constitution was a resounding 55% 'Non'...
(http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/05/30/france.eu/index.html)
Did this come as such a surprise? France was the 10th nation to call a referendum on the adoption of the EU constitution and the first to reject it. Why is it that both the political -left as well as the -right could find reason enough to call foul? After all, "the constitution brings together for the first time the many treaties and agreements on which the EU is based. It defines the powers of the EU, stating where it can act and where the member states retain their right of veto."...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/2950276.stm
Perhaps the answer lies in the paradigm involved in the translation of the intent of the constitution? How then does this bode for other nations involved? In order to find a likely rationale one needs to analyse the various aspects of the constitution from a multilateral perspective. On the left, the constitution is seen as 'too capitalist'; the constitution places a lot of emphasis on the rules regarding trade within the EU. Is it equally equitable to all 25 nations within the EU? On the right, the constitution is seen as been 'too centrist', that is to say, it affords the European parlaiment too much of a say into the policy making within governments in the Eurozone. Does this deprive nations of their identity?
European politics finds itself increasingly polarised from within. Over the course of many of the recent elections throughout the EU one would be forgiven for thinking that governments were out of touch with their constituents. In the recent UK elections the ruling labour party had its majority cut from 161 seats to 67 seats...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/vote_2005/default.stm
Last year the Spanish government of Jose Maria Aznar was ousted shortly after the Madrid train bombings, and replaced by the socialist party of jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero...
http://mediamatters.org/items/200407150007
...and although the al-Quaeda ifluence should not be understated, it should also be recognised that the pro-Iraq war stance of Aznar's administration stood in stark defiance of the sentiment of the majority of Spaniards.
So where to for the European Union? The Netherlands are set to have their referendum on the EU constitution shortly. It is a widely held belief among those polled that the current EU consitution is not popular. But those same people polled agreed that it did not mean that they were against the European Union as a whole... just as it is in it's current form. Brussels needs to realise that to opt for a US/Anglo-Saxon style constitution will always be problematic in the far more heterogeneous community that is Europe.
(http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/05/30/france.eu/index.html)
Did this come as such a surprise? France was the 10th nation to call a referendum on the adoption of the EU constitution and the first to reject it. Why is it that both the political -left as well as the -right could find reason enough to call foul? After all, "the constitution brings together for the first time the many treaties and agreements on which the EU is based. It defines the powers of the EU, stating where it can act and where the member states retain their right of veto."...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/2950276.stm
Perhaps the answer lies in the paradigm involved in the translation of the intent of the constitution? How then does this bode for other nations involved? In order to find a likely rationale one needs to analyse the various aspects of the constitution from a multilateral perspective. On the left, the constitution is seen as 'too capitalist'; the constitution places a lot of emphasis on the rules regarding trade within the EU. Is it equally equitable to all 25 nations within the EU? On the right, the constitution is seen as been 'too centrist', that is to say, it affords the European parlaiment too much of a say into the policy making within governments in the Eurozone. Does this deprive nations of their identity?
European politics finds itself increasingly polarised from within. Over the course of many of the recent elections throughout the EU one would be forgiven for thinking that governments were out of touch with their constituents. In the recent UK elections the ruling labour party had its majority cut from 161 seats to 67 seats...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/vote_2005/default.stm
Last year the Spanish government of Jose Maria Aznar was ousted shortly after the Madrid train bombings, and replaced by the socialist party of jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero...
http://mediamatters.org/items/200407150007
...and although the al-Quaeda ifluence should not be understated, it should also be recognised that the pro-Iraq war stance of Aznar's administration stood in stark defiance of the sentiment of the majority of Spaniards.
So where to for the European Union? The Netherlands are set to have their referendum on the EU constitution shortly. It is a widely held belief among those polled that the current EU consitution is not popular. But those same people polled agreed that it did not mean that they were against the European Union as a whole... just as it is in it's current form. Brussels needs to realise that to opt for a US/Anglo-Saxon style constitution will always be problematic in the far more heterogeneous community that is Europe.
posted by Icarus at 2:20:00 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home