Thoughts about the European Union.

[Earniel]

Belgium, for example, is virtually a satellite of France.

Belgium is NOT a satellite of France, virtually or otherwise. We can think for ourselves and we don't always agree with France.

As for the rest, I agree completely with what Artanis said in her previous post.

Though with 25 members as opposed to the previous 15, it's going to be a tremendous feat to orchestrate the functioning of the European Union. We can expect quite some bumbs on our way there.

[Jonathan]

I think Artanis summed it up pretty good there. National interests plays a big role in the EU and will continue to do for quite some time.

I saw the failure of the Constitution coming. You have France and Germany on one side and Spain and Poland on the other. None of these countries wants to see its power in the EU reduced.

In Poland it is political suicide for any politician to make concessions for Germany.
The mayor of Warsaw said that those who even discuss a reduced Polish influence are traitors. The Polish newspapers have headlines which say "Nice or death" (referring to summit in Nice where Poland was guaranteed 27 votes in the EU Council of Ministers, while Germany with a population twice as big as Poland's only got 29 votes).
And in Germany, after Poland stood up for the US in the war in Iraq, many Germans see the Poles as American henchmen.

But at least Chancellor Shröeder and Prime Minister Miller are ready to discuss and debate. Both have assured one another that the polemic will not affect the relations between Germany and Poland.


I read that talks about the Constitution can be held in 2005 at the earliest. So I believe we will have to wait a long time before we see a new Constitution in action.

[Elvellon]

Indeed, Artanis surmised the problem well.

Further, I believe the enlargement was, at this time, a mistake. The reform should have been accomplished before, and only then should we have follow through with the enlargement. Still, most were willing to compromise, and that seems to indicate that the problem will inevitably be solved in the future.

[The Gaffer]

A lot of people here in the UK regard it as a good thing that the constitutional talks have stalled because they feel it is going ahead too fast.

Not least amongst these is Tony Blair, since he's outwardly pro-Euro but secretly scared to call a referendum and this means that he can put it off indefinitely.

The EU seems like it is trying to walk before it can run, here. A whole bunch of new states are joining up at the same time as they're trying to tighten the integration between member states. Maybe one thing at a time would be best.

For me, there are two things that have to be addressed before we integrate further:

1) The democratic deficit which is at the heart of Europe: it is too remote from individuals, it is manifestly corrupt (its accountants have just refused to ratify its account for the eighth year running, and some countries routinely ignore rulings and agreements without sanction) and it is unaccountable.

2) On a more UK-specific level: the vulnerability of British people to interest rate changes. Here in the UK, we have a much higher level of home ownership, mostly funded by extensive mortgage borrowing (some banks are lending 5x your salary). These people would be really hammered by any interest rate rise.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Artanis
I don't think the quarrel about Iraq is the cause of the problems we see today. The problems with the Iraq issue and the Constitution are rather both symptoms. The European countries seem to have lost their visions. When it comes to action, national interests still weights more than the common good. Schröeder is quite right there, and it goes for all countries.

I wasn't saying it was a result of Iraq. I think it is France and Germany's general attitude - which played out over the Iraq situation and is now playing out in the EU. As I said last year - I feel that Germany and particularly France wants to create a power bloc between themselves and have a stronger influence on the EU.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Elvellon
Further, I believe the enlargement was, at this time, a mistake. The reform should have been accomplished before, and only then should we have follow through with the enlargement. Still, most were willing to compromise, and that seems to indicate that the problem will inevitably be solved in the future.

Last year I had also said that I felt they were going too fast. That they should get the EU working with a few countries - work out the problems and differences - before accepting new countries. It's much easier to negotiate with a few - then to try getting things done with so many.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Eärniel
Belgium is NOT a satellite of France, virtually or otherwise. We can think for ourselves and we don't always agree with France.

I think what they mean by "satelite of France" is the same way New Jersey is always just considered either part of the New York metropolitan area or the Philadelphia metropolitan area. Everyone just considers New Jersey as a suburb of NY. As a small but powerful state - to a future small but powerful state of the EU - you better fight now - before you lose your identy to that of France.

New Jersey had to take to court a census thing that would have virtually made NJ non-existent. The government puts out reports that companies and others use to determine where to move, where to open up businesses, etc. Southern New Jersey was just going to be wrapped up into the Philadelphia statitics and Northern New Jersey was just going to be wrapped up in the New York City statics. This would mean that no one would even be able to see what NJ has to offer over these two places.

New Jersey does NOT have a unique identity (to the outside world anyway) or really a high self respect because we are stuck between to major metropolitan cities. Philadelphia is far less obnoxious and arrogant though and New York toward New Jersey.

[Nurvingiel]

*bump*

Don't worry Eärniel, I'll help promote Belgium individualism!

I know cheesed I'd be if Canada were considered a satellite of the USA. Some people already do. *suppresses rage* Don't start with me now JD.

Anyhoo, here's also another thread about the 10 countries that joined the EU in 2004 - 10 Countries admitted to the EU

Now for a general EU discussion... there was a lot of talk of EU policy in the Increased Islamic Influence in European Nations thread, let's continue that here.

Oh yeah... and...

List of Member Countries

Austria
Belgium
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Ireland
Italy
Latvia
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Malta
Poland
Portugal
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
The Netherlands
United Kingdom

Applicants
Bulgaria
Croatia
Romania
Turkey

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

*bump*

Don't worry Eärniel, I'll help promote Belgium individualism!

I know cheesed I'd be if Canada were considered a satellite of the USA. Some people already do. *suppresses rage* Don't start with me now JD.

Sorry - sometimes the truth hurts and Belgium has been acting like the lapdog of France and Germany. Not so much now - but definely last year. I haven't seen much of Belgium on French news much - now they seem to have been pushed aside in favor of Spain for the time being (but the two good ole buddies who want to rule the EU are still hand in hand).

It would be nice if Belgium showed their individualism and didn't just try to ride on the coattails ofit's two big neighbors. Believe me - Belgium will be lost and forgotten once they get their way.

[Jonathan]

Applicants
Bulgaria
Croatia
Bulgaria
Turkey

You forgot about Romania. Both Romania and Bulgaria will join in 2007.

Originally Posted by jerseydevil

Sorry - sometimes the truth hurts and Belgium has been acting like the lapdog of France and Germany etc. etc.

Oh please. After the war in Iraq, would you call the UK the lapdog of America? God forbid that the British government did what they thought was right and instead followed the US blindly.

Belgium might share many views with France and Germany. It doesn't make the country a satellite state.

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by Jonathan

Oh please. After the war in Iraq, would you call the UK the lapdog of America? God forbid that the British government did what they thought was right and instead followed the US blindly.

Belgium might share many views with France and Germany. It doesn't make the country a satellite state.

Well they were acting more like a satelite state and now that France and Germany have Spain - Belgium seems to have been pushed to the side. So yes - it is different than teh UK and America. For one thing - UK and America aren't part of a single government body like France and Germany and Belgium are. Belgium is perfectly aware where it's bread will be buttered if France and Germany succeed in wrestling contol of the EU.

[Earniel]

You know, I honestly don't know whether I should laugh at this or be angry.

So unless we follow policies that are lina recta opposite of France and Germany we're just a French poodle... marvelous political insight. How on earth do you come up with this and believe it as well? Is this because Belgium opposed the war in Iraq?

JD, I don't know where you're getting these ideas. The truth hurts you say, but this isn't truth, this is... idiocy.

And like we care to make the French news, seen all the ranting you done about them lately, I think we should be glad not to be on it.

[Nurvingiel]

Originally Posted by Jonathan

You forgot about Romania. Both Romania and Bulgaria will join in 2007.

Oh yeah, cheers. I meant to type "Romania" where I put "Bulgaria" the second time.

[jerseydevil]

Originally Posted by Eärniel

You know, I honestly don't know whether I should laugh at this or be angry.

So unless we follow policies that are lina recta opposite of France and Germany we're just a French poodle... marvelous political insight. How on earth do you come up with this and believe it as well? Is this because Belgium opposed the war in Iraq?

no - it has nothing to do with opposing the war in Iraq actually. it has to do with the meetings between Belgium, Germany and Francce for the EU meetings last year. Soime of which - France was so close and buddy buddy with Germany - that France voted for Germany when they weren't there.

JD, I don't know where you're getting these ideas. The truth hurts you say, but this isn't truth, this is... idiocy.

That's fine. I hope I'm right for your sake. If not - welcome to the EU as defined by France and Germany.

And like we care to make the French news, seen all the ranting you done about them lately, I think we should be glad not to be on it.

You should be glad you're not on it too much. But I guess thye don't need Belgium anymore - now that they have Spain to support their views. So where does that leave Belgium in the whole EU montage? One small state - surrounded by 3 heavy hitters, two of which are out to control it.

You can't deny that was why they wanted to change the way votes are cast before the new new members came on board in 2004. France and Germany didn't want their power to be erroded - so they were pushing for that change - whih the eastern european countries called foul on.

[The Gaffer]

It's probably more true to say that the EU (or the EC as it was pre-Maastricht) was far more of a Franco-German stitch-up club in the past than it is likely to be in the future.

We shouldn't be surprised that groups within the EU kick and scream when their influence gets diluted, but it's important that they don't get away with it.

The most disappointing thing about the EU for me is the lack of leadership. The Commission are very much stooges placed by member states to represent their own interests first and foremost. IMO, the principles of the EU are sound and aspirational and I think they need to be vigorously defended from narrow national interests.

[Nurvingiel]

I agree Gaffer. I think there's a fine balance between getting things done and having member nations being told what to do by a handful of countries.

To achieve one I think the other must be sacrified, at least to a certain degree. I think it's possible to have autonomy at the same time as an alliance for a greater good (such as stronger economies and fair trade), but so far, human beings stink at this. I think previous attempts to make environmental policy on a global scale illustrates this, but it doesn't mean we should stop trying.

[The Gaffer]

Quite right! These things are too important to leave to the "free market" of multinationals and their puppet governments.

[Nurvingiel]

Aha, the real EU thread.

Oooh, don't get me started about free markets. As a Canadian, this reminds me of those irritating words "free trade". If you work in the lumber industry in British Columbia (logging is our largest industry), "free trade" translates to "the Americans get to impose terriffs on our softwood anyway" and "we will sell them cheap power regardless". Personally, I think we should flip the switch, but that's another thread.

My point with this is I hope economically smaller nations don't get ripped off by powerful partner nations in an economic agreement, whether it's going back on a no-tarriff agreement, or something else.

[The Gaffer]

Yeah, there's no such thing as a free market.

I guess it's all about overcoming short-sighted national interest. Governments have a duty to get the best deal they can for their country, but that's not necessarily what's best for everyone. The EU is very much an exercise in trying to make the broader view prevail, though of course there are lots of issues around establishing agreements and implementation!

However, the key thing is not to give up.

[Last Child of Ungoliant]

felt i had to subscribe to this thread, as it is an interesting read,

on the french:
The EU is a club to which one is joined, but a philosophy to which one does not adhere to