Tuesday, November 17, 2009

European Union

European integration has been moving along since the Treaty of Maastrict of 1993.  There have been grandiose predictions of political integration into what would become a "United States of Europe."

Much like in the times of Jefferson and Washington, there is much debate about how much sovereignty will be retained by member states.   Some member states such as Britain have opted to be part of the common market while retaining their own currency and monetary policy.

With the ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon, the EU Presidency will no longer be held on a rotating basis by one of the member nations.  Instead it will become a permanent office with fixed terms.  There is talk of a European army that could function as a rapid deployment force with the EU President serving as the Commander in Chief.

Despite the self professed sophistication of European nations, they have gone about this in a most unsophisticated way.  Tony Blair was considered a front runner to be the first EU President.  Yet despite his interest and profile, it appears that Tony Blair will not be successful.  He has failed to successfully lobby the member nations in the back rooms where the deal is done.  Some small nations are said to insist that the President come from a smaller nation.  Some of the larger nations simply do not want a Brit to lead the EU.

Hey I have an idea:  maybe the Executive leader of 500 million people ought to be elected rather than selected through backroom deals??

While this may be a revolutionary idea on a continent where several 'sophisticated' countries continue to have hereditary monarchs as heads of state, it would seem to be an obvious choice.

The European Union is a dynamic economic entity where goods and labour move freely.  It has helped to create prosperity throughout its member nations.  However the record on non-commercial matters is shameful.

When the former Yugoslavia descended into chaos and genocide, the powerful nations of Europe did not act. Sadly this is a continuation of patterns established during the rise of the Third Reich.  The great powers let tragedy unfold in their very own backyard (some would say that it is more apt to say that it happened in their living room.)  As in the Great War and the Second World War, the killing did not stop until a duly elected President of the United States of America ordered his nation's military into action.

Europeans bemoan the fact that America often acts as the world's policeman yet the EU is richer and more populous than America.  The United States of Europe could act as a democratic counterweight and/or partner to the United States of America and this would be good for the world.

But first they need to figure out how to create a strong and duly elected office of the President.  They need not reinvent the wheel.  They can just look across the pond to find an example......unless they are too sophisticated to do so.

4 comments:

  1. "As in the Great War and the Second World War, the killing did not stop until a duly elected President of the United States of America ordered his nation's military into action."

    Why would you go wrecking a perfectly good argument with a nonsensical apologia for the most self-promoting nation on earth?

    In both cases teh US only got involved when its own citizens were attacked on its own territory, and was more than happy to let the killing continue indefinitely so long as it happened elsewhere. Let's not pretend the US has some sterling moral record on this, or that a democratically elected head-of-state is some magic bullet for solving humanitarian crises. It can be exactly the opposite, when due to public pressure the president fails to do what is morally right. (It's not hard to think of several modern examples.)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Point of Order Mr Speaker. The United States was not directly attacked in WW I and not in the Balkan War either.

    Winston Churchill called the United States the "Arsenal of Democracy."

    He was right. Your tangential criticism misses the point entirely.

    ReplyDelete
  3. 1. Lusitania
    2. Pearl Harbour

    Quotes are neither evidence nor argument.

    Your tangential argument misses your own thesis entirely, which is unfortunate. Think about it: should the EU have an elected head-of-state because the US sometimes decides to get involved in major humanitarian conflicts and they have a democratically elected president whether or not there is any relation between those elements whatsoever, or... should they have a duly elected head-of-state because it is the right of people to choose their government regardless of whether or not what they choose to do with it is morally right?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Andrea Pearl Harbor was the Second World War. I said that the US was not directly attacked in WWI and the Balkan war. The Lusitania was a British flagged vessel.

    The point is that a strong office of the Presidency with the legitimacy of an election can order troops into battle. An administrative position voted on by a council is a recipe for weakness.

    ReplyDelete