Europe: A Clash of Dreams
Deniz Akkan*
One can push the limits of optimism and say that the last week’s Referenda Crisis is just another bump on the road to the Europe United, strong enough to stir up the Union for a while but not enough to push the carrier off the road. After all, the French do seem to have a tradition of pioneering a project and then not backing up their own ideas, as it has been the case in 1954 for the “Common Defense Policy”. And as for the Dutch, they were so excited to have a referendum for the first time in 200 years that they just couldn’t wait to get it all out at once! They had build up so many “NO”s in time (No to the government, No to their policy changes, No to the Muslims, No to Euro, No to the enlargement, No to losing their jobs, and No to the changing world) that they were ready to stick it up high, whatever question had been asked! Therefore, if one desperately wanted to play Pollyanna, there are enough excuses to come up with a reasonable story. However, this once, it is time to face it: the EU is going thru the deepest crisis ever throughout its history of over half a century.
Many say that this is a natural reaction / a consequence of the economical conditions (stagnation and increasing unemployment due partly to the enlargement), and the reflection of pure egoism and caprice of the rich countries that are not willing to share what they have by resisting to integrate into the global system. However, many would also agree that this is the beginning of an honest and healthy debate for Europe. So far, there have been too many answers given to “why should we NOT unite?”. Now is the time everyone should ask once and for all, the right question, “why SHOULD we unite?”.
This confrontation brings the issues down to the bottom line: How to survive the social state? It is not the best-kept secret of the century that the EU has lost its competitiveness against other parts of the world. However, lost in total denial, countries like France can still turn a blind eye to the world and can still make themselves believe that they can fight off globalization and the erosion of their power from world politics single handedly. However, every French child is born into the globalization whether they like it or not and France can only exist in a stronger Europe! The contrary, which is only an illusion, has been nourished by the local/national politicians who blamed the EU for the toughest (yet unavoidable) reforms and used it as a scapegoat over the years.
Vetoing the constitution will not help avoid the dreaded for any member of the Union. The social state has become unaffordable for the old continent and unless liberal market economy rules over the entire European economic policies, Europe will dismantle into weaker pieces, which will easily be absorbed by the emerging powers who grow in billions every year.
Lost in their small worlds, and missed the big picture by far, the European public who would like to postpone - if not cancel - the “political union” project, seem to be having conflicting ideas of what they want in life. Insisting on keeping all their social rights, and limiting their relations to a union of common rights and economy, they want to be world’s superpower, without a military force, without a single foreign policy, without common creative solutions to their bottleneck issues. These are conflicting expectations, which create conflicting policies. Europe has gone too far and too deep to stop and go back to the days of libre-echange. There is only one way left: that is the way forward. The European Project would only make sense when completed, as a political union. Therefore, those pedals have to be pushed hard, rolling ahead, keeping up the pace.
That would require local/national politicians to be honest with the public and face facts. The European Project has no alternative. It should not be presented as an overpriced choice. The protective shield that a strong Europe can provide is simply the only way to survive for any member of the Union. For that reason, encouraging intolerance, xenophobia and boosting national feelings, in the long run, are not helping anyone.
The European political elite have made a wise call on December 17th 2004 by setting a date for the Turkish negotiations and taking a brave step forward. Turkish membership will make enormous contributions to the European Project, with regards to the economy, culture, politics and defense. It is a pity to see the wide gap between the political elite and the regular public in Europe, but that is a topic on its own, too broad to be discussed in this article.
It is worth sharing an observation about the referenda discussions in both France and Holland: Despite the bombardment of ideologies and fierce promotions against the constitution over the Turkish accession, Turkey has not even been pronounced in any of the debates which have taken place after the Referenda! Undoubtly, this should reveal to the public once and for all that Turkey is not to blame for the unavoidable reforms that the member countries have to carry out eventually and that keeping Turkey out will not protect them from the effects of globalization. The debate on the future of Europe should not be brought down to the question of Turkish accession. The call to be made is about where people want to see themselves in life. In a strong Europe or in a Europe of shattered dreams?
Therefore, the No vote should have no implications on the opening date of the Turkish negotiations, October 3rd, 2005. Despite the results of the polls, postponing or calling the negotiations off with Turkey has a price the EU can not easily pay off. Let alone the erosion of prestige, the EU would lose all credibility and could no longer claim to be a union of rights and the land of the rule of law. However, it is a fact that opening the negations on time does not imply concluding them with a full membership, within the next decade. It will be no surprise to hear the term “Reinforced Cooperation” come up more than once during the long and drastic negotiations that Turkey will be undergoing with the EU. Hopefully by then, Europe will have a clear definition and Turkey will have a clear record.
June 2005
*Deniz Akkan is a PhD in EU Economics at Marmara University of Istanbul.
PREVIOUS PAGE
|
