The
European Union has been a conundrum for the United States and even its own
members since its earliest years. Highlighting this has been the interesting,
but perplexing, vigorous objection that exists within Britain in respect to
leaving the EU. To begin with, their decision to support withdrawal was
approved by referendum 51.9% to 48.1%. Now another referendum is being
demanded. The focus of “remaining” or “leaving” has shifted repeatedly. Most
recently there has been conflict within the EU over the issue of free migration
– or at least the ability to travel about and work without restriction in the
member countries by their respective citizens.
To
complicate matters regarding freedom of movement has been the arrival of the
American, Steve Bannon He is
characterized in some of the press as a member of the so-called “far right”
that is now seeking international status while pushing their rather generalized
stance on strict controls on migration between and among countries in general. Of
course, this theme is equally anathema to the Remainers as it is honey to the Leaver
bears. Bannon obviously loves every minute of his expanded and revitalized
attraction.
Unfortunately,
this single-issue focus does more to cloud the overall problem than it does to
clarify. This fact tends to be lost in the constant political race with the
unknown by the unknowing. What is not being done is to consider how the entire
matter of the unification of Europe originally was conceived and what it has
become. For the sake of dispassionate analysis, let's look at the evolution.
The
basis of the creation of a unified Europe (meaning originally Western Europe)
was a desire to rebuild after WWII and hopefully in 1951 an instrument to
prevent yet another war. These aims
quickly gave way to the fear of a Russian–backed communist takeover of the
areas west of the areas already taken over by the Red Army from Germany. That
was swiftly to become an ancillary, if unspoken, aspect of European
unification. The sequence of evolution has gone as follows:
1951 –
European Coal and Steel Community - West Germany, Belgium, Luxembourg, France,
Italy, Netherlands. 1957 - European Economic Community (EEC) [forming a common
market among the above nations including thereby the European Atomic Energy
Community.] 1967 - The above countries merge into one under a Council of
Ministers forming a European Parliament. 1979 - Direct election for Euro
parliament held. 1993 - EU created and monetary union begun. 2002 - Euro
replaces national currencies in twelve of fifteen countries in EU. 2004 - 10
additional countries join with the new constitution, but in 2005 France and
Netherlands reject the new document. 2007 there are two more countries added to
the EU that now has 28 members.
Further
to this discussion: It is more important at this point to accept the fact that
the European Union, as it exists today, benefited immensely from the Russian
withdrawal and the conceptual encouragement from the United States. What has
evolved today is an apparently successful amalgamation of nations - though more
for some and less for others. At the moment, many in Britain feel they are decidedly
in the latter situation. However, this is hardly a unanimous view.
Coincidently,
Europe is embroiled in a strong reaction by what the “Guardian” newspaper has
referred to as the “populist far-right”. While strongly represented in Italy,
this movement is said to also have a serious following in Poland and Hungary
with high profiles in France and the Netherlands. Most importantly Germany's
AfD party (Alternative for Germany) according to a Sept. 3, 2018 poll is
running second only to the traditional Christian conservative CDU, with the
liberal socialist SDP in third place. The situation in Europe in general - and
specifically in terms of the EU election – is said to be growing in support of
defending national identity and opposition to migration. To add to this sense
that is increasing, though not yet in a dominant position, there is a striking
growth of opposition to increasing European integration.
All
this is going on as Britain is trying to decide if it wants to remain a part of
this new 21st century reality. Obviously, the strongest force in
this decision-making would be the economic numbers relative to the advantage of
staying in in the club. Unfortunately,
these figures are under serious dispute and/or are seemingly unclear. Naturally
this also plays into the hands of the other national opposition groupings
mentioned previously. The United States is so focused on its own internal
divisions it is quite unable, or even interested, in paying attention to what's
going on among its own European allies.
One
would think that Moscow would be smacking its lips at the European disarray,
but that's not happening. Russia itself has become so involved in its trade
with and investment in the EU market that even their vaunted international
political machine is dashing about trying to figure out which way to turn.
Meanwhile, partisan politicians of all stripes are making a living from
conventions, fund raising, and generally wherever they can stir up public
reaction.
The
good thing is that now for the first time since the end of WWII no one is
talking about a hot war in Europe. However, all the aggressive yet peaceful
argumentation and political action does get rough enough. That is particularly
true when those wanting to leave the EU in Britain and elsewhere are being
urged on by groups ranging from rabid nationalists to strictly political opportunists
of all colors and interests. Of course, this also applies to those who remain
ardent supporters of the European Union concept. In the past it was easier.
They just killed each other!
Comments
Post a Comment