Figuring out what to do

While countries are sporting their national colors and cheering on their respective football teams during the European Cup, there is one country that seems to be going in the complete opposite direction. Ireland has rejected the Treaty of Lisbon with a clear majority of 53.4 percent. The European Commission has already stated that there is not a “Plan B” in case this did happen, and it is not surprising that there is a lot of chatter coming out of Brussels asking; “well, what do we do now?”

There have been a couple of suggestions. The first is simply having the Irish hold yet another referendum just as they did after they rejected the Treaty of Nice in 2001. Another suggestion has been to simply go ahead with the ratification process and give Ireland an “opting” out, whereas different countries will integrate their economies at the EU level in different degrees, or rather, the EU will have “multiple speeds” and thus, multiple levels of integration between its members.

Holding another referendum seems highly risky and could prove to be even more disastrous if the treaty fails once again, which will send an even clearer message to Brussels that the Irish just do not want the type of integration that the other heads of government have been hoping for. Additionally, in my opinion, holding another referendum undermines the whole point of having one in the first place, especially if the EU is trying to counter the arguments that it has a lack of democracy. I’m not arguing that having a referendum is the most democratic way to go, but if you do not accept that a country has rejected a treaty according to the appropriate methods based on their constitution, then that sends a pretty bad message. Instead it may become easier and prove to be less of a risk by having the remaining countries go ahead with the ratification process and try to isolate Ireland in its “No” stance.

This however is also tricky and dangerous. Firstly all eyes are turning toward Great Britain and the Czech Republic. Mostly thanks to Gordon Brown Great Britain, which is probably the most famous anti-EU country, was able to withstand the pressure of holding its own referendum by winning concessions on being able to opt out of binding itself to the “Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union” as well as not having to follow any decisions relating to police and judicial affairs that resulted from having reached a qualified majority. However, with Mr. Brown’s heavy loss at the polls a couple of months ago, as well as Ireland saying no, the pressure could be back on to put the treaty under more scrutiny and question whether a ratification through Parliament is the way to go, which would without a doubt give the No camp more time and influence to mobilize the opposition. Secondly, I can’t really see how Ireland can opt out of the Treaty of Lisbon, as the treaty is a huge step forward in the integration process. Granted, having an opting out in the area of foreign policy is relatively easy as Ireland has proved to hold a strictly neutral stance in international politics, and besides, any foreign policy decisions would still be made by the respective governments of the member states despite having a High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, I however still really cannot see how Ireland can possibly opt out of the other major changes that the treaty would have made. The treaty would make the use of reaching a qualified majority the main method of decision making in the Council (naturally except in the area of foreign affairs), and decrease the size of the Commission from 27 to 17. Where would Ireland fall in? Would the old rules of decision making only apply to Ireland when it involves Ireland? Does Ireland immediately become one of the 17?

Lastly and most importantly, what is the point of having a ratification process if countries can freely opt out of treaties if they are not ratified in their home country? Moving without Ireland will shake the foundations of the EU and further isolate itself away from its main goals, in which they are striving for in the first place. Transparency, Democracy and Unity. Sadly, according to P O Neil over at A Fistful of Euros, the current line of thought is just leave it up to Ireland to clean up the mess, as he refers to a statement from the UK Foreign Secretary David Miliband that:

If you like he’s [Irish PM Brian Cowen] got to decide whether or not to apply the last rites. We’ve got to listen to his analysis of what went wrong.

If the Treaty of Lisbon can be saved this is probably the wrong way to do it, by, to steal PO Neil’s title, “passing the parcel.” If they are assuming this is an Irish problem then they are gravely mistaken as it is an European problem. The EU should either move with Ireland or not move at all.

Moving without Ireland will further hinder the EU integration process and severely tip the weight of influence in the favor of the bigger countries such as Germany, France, Great Britain, and to a lesser extent the Netherlands. Where these countries did have a lot of weight and influence in the earlier days of the European Community, when the EU expanded to 27 member states while tying all these states to the same decision making processes and functions, their weight and influence slowly decreased. Having multiple speeds of integration will without a doubt produce a vacuum towards these more economically powerful states and will create an atmosphere, in which these states will take the lead and produce policies that are beneficial to them and forcing the smaller countries to follow them whether they like it or not. Furthermore one must not forget to mention that it would be even harder than before, if not impossible to establish a common EU foreign policy, which will make it even easier for countries like the United States or Russia to continue and more effectively implement their respective “divide and conquer” strategies and easily grasp those countries who do not wish to be sucked into the vacuum of these aforementioned larger states by offering and establishing bilateral deals, which will further divide Europe policy-wise.

In my view, Ireland not ratifying Lisbon was a clear message to the politicians in Brussels that further integration is just not possible without first clarifying what the EU does, and why it is good to the common “EU-Citizen.” I believe the EU to be an effective institution that is greatly aiding those who are a member of it. I have read the literature, seen the arguments and statistics, and attended the lectures. But, as has been proved not merely with the Irish rejecting the Treaty but rather how it was rejected, the common man, woman, and child just do not have an idea. This has been the age old argument ever since the integration process found a new life in the 80’s, but the EU needs to give its people a face that it can understand and accept. If the treaty can be rejected under false pretenses that it will somehow force the Irish to legalize abortion or control how many children they can have then there is something definitely wrong here. Just watching the news one could probably see a pattern as the same answer was given for voting “NO” being, “I didn’t know what the treaty was about.” What’s more, with Belgium and Luxembourg being the exception, if the rest of the member states would have held a referendum we would have probably seen the same result.

Does this mean that the Irish are an unintelligent people and haven’t fully grasped that the EU was more or less the cause of their economic boom and the reason for the rise of their standard of living? I don’t think so. I think it merely confirms that the European Commission has been incapable of connecting with its citizens. If you look at any treaty you will find it to be extraordinary long and if you are not a politician, lawyer, or currently studying the EU then you will have a hard time understanding it. Even their website is cluttered and unorganized, and if you do try to find information you are met with countless and endless links to various pages, where half the time will be spent on clicking on links rather than finding the relevant information. Perhaps it’s finally time to start thinking of what is on the inside, rather than who the next new member state should be. The EU needs to strengthen its image before it can move on. It needs to make itself more understandable to its citizens while clearly stating why it should exist and why it is beneficial for the common person and not just another project driven by the elites. The ironic thing is that this is what the new treaty would have done.  But how can you know this treaty is an improvement if you didn’t understand the previous treaties in the first place?

Whether or not there is hope for the Treaty of Lisbon remains to be seen. What I can probably clearly state here is that it is a major step backwards for the integration project, not to mention a complete catastrophe for the EU’s foreign policy. How the EU moves forward remains to be seen, but it must move with all 27 member states and leave no-one behind.