>>> Μην με παρεξηγήσετε >>> αλλά ο τρόπος παρουσίασης από τα ΜΜΕ >>> του πολέμου στην Ουκρανία και των επιπτώσεών του >>> θυμίζει τηλεοπτική εκπομπή, με τοποθέτηση προϊόντος >>> και το προϊόν είναι το αμερικανικό LNG >>> το "καλό", το ακριβό, το αμερικάνικο LNG....
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Τρίτη 22 Ιανουαρίου 2013
United Kingdom Moves Away from the European Project
By Adriano Bosoni
British Prime Minister
David Cameron will deliver a speech in London on Jan. 23, during which he will
discuss the future of the United Kingdom's relationship with the European
Union. Excerpts leaked to the media suggest that harsh EU criticism will figure
prominently in the speech, a suggestion in keeping with Cameron's recent
statements about the bloc. But more important, the excerpts signal an
unprecedented policy departure: renegotiating the
United Kingdom's role in the
European Union. London has negotiated exemptions from some EU policies in the
past, even gaining some concessions from Brussels in the process; this time, it
is trying to become less integrated with the bloc altogether.
Cameron has pledged to
hold a referendum after 2015 on the United Kingdom's role in Europe. He has
also said he would reclaim powers London surrendered to the European Union.
While they no doubt reflect similar anxieties across the Continent, such
statements are anathema to the European project, and by making them, Cameron could
be setting a precedent that could further undermine the European Union.
Cameron's Compromise
Cameron's strategy
partly is a reaction to British domestic politics. There is a faction within
the ruling Conservative Party that believes the country should abandon the
European Union entirely. It was this faction that pressed Cameron to call a
referendum on the United Kingdom's EU membership. Some party members also fear
that the United Kingdom Independence Party, the country's traditionally
euroskeptic party, is gaining ground in the country.
Such fears may be well
founded. According to various opinion polls, roughly 8-14 percent of the
country supports the United Kingdom Independence Party, even though it received
only 3.1 percent of the popular vote in the 2010 elections. These levels of
support make the party a serious contender with the Liberal Democrats as the
United Kingdom's third-largest party (after the Labour Party and the
Conservative Party). Some polls show that the United Kingdom Independence Party
already is the third-most popular party, while others suggest it has poached
members from the Conservative Party, a worrying trend ahead of elections for
the European Parliament in 2014 and general elections in 2015.
Its growing popularity
can be attributed to other factors. Beyond its anti-EU rhetoric, the United
Kingdom Independence Party is gaining strength as an anti-establishment voice
in the country, supported by those disappointed with mainstream British
parties. Similar situations are developing elsewhere in Europe, where the
ongoing crisis has weakened the traditional political elite.
The debate over the
United Kingdom's role in the European Union is also causing friction with the
Conservatives' junior coalition partner, the Liberal Democrats. Party leader
and Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg has repeatedly criticized the
Conservatives' push for a referendum, arguing that the proposal is creating
uncertainty in the country and by extension threatening economic growth and job
creation. Several of the country's top businessmen share this belief. On Jan.
9, Virgin Group's Richard Branson, London Stock Exchange head Chris
Gibson-Smith and eight other business leaders published a letter in the
Financial Times criticizing Cameron's plan to renegotiate EU membership terms.
British citizens
likewise are conflicted on the subject. In general, polls have shown that a
slight majority of Britons favor leaving the European Union, but recent surveys
found that opinion was evenly split. Conservative Party voters particularly
support an EU withdrawal.
Given the issue's
sensitivity, Cameron has sought to please everyone. He said there would be a
referendum, but it would entail the United Kingdom's position in the European
Union, not British membership. Despite his criticisms of the bloc, Cameron has
said he does not want to leave the European Union outright; rather, he wants to
repatriate from Brussels as many powers as possible. Cameron believes the
United Kingdom still needs direct access to Europe's common market but that
London should regain power regarding such issues as employment legislation and
social and judicial affairs. Most important, the referendum would take place
after the general elections of 2015.
London's Costs of
Membership
London also believes
that the United Kingdom has surrendered too much of its national sovereignty to
supranational EU institutions. The United Kingdom is a net contributor to the
European Union, and London feels that the costs of membership exceed the benefits.
The Common Agricultural Policy, which subsidizes agricultural sectors in
continental Europe, does not really benefit the United Kingdom, and the Common
Fisheries Policy has forced the United Kingdom to share its fishing waters with
other EU member states.
Yet the United Kingdom
is a strong defender of the single market. Roughly half of its exports end up
in the European Union, and half of its imports come from the European Union.
While the United States is the United Kingdom's single most important export
destination, four of its five top export destinations are eurozone countries:
Germany, the Netherlands, France and Ireland. Germany is also the source of
about 12.6 percent of all British imports.
Some critics suggest
that the United Kingdom could leave the European Union but remain a part of the
European Economic Area, the trade agreement that includes non-EU members, such
as Iceland and Norway. However, the country would still be required to make
financial contributions to continental Europe and adapt its legal order to EU
standards, but it would not have a vote in EU decisions. According to Cameron,
the United Kingdom must be part of the common market and have a say in
policymaking.
The issue points to
the United Kingdom's grand strategy. Despite an alliance with the United
States, the United Kingdom is essentially a European power, and it cannot
afford to be excluded from Continental affairs. Throughout history, London's
foremost concern has been the emergence of a single European power that could
threaten the British Isles politically, economically or militarily. Maintaining
the balance of power in the Continent -- especially one in which London has
some degree of influence -- is a strategic imperative for the United Kingdom.
The United Kingdom's Strategic
Dilemma
The United Kingdom's
push to renegotiate its status in the European Union threatens the European
project. In the past, the bloc granted special concessions to the British, such
as allowing them to keep the pound sterling during Maastricht Treaty
negotiations. These concessions inspired other EU members to ask for similar
treatment -- most notably Denmark, which also managed to opt out of the euro.
However, this is the
first time that London has openly demanded the return to a previous stage in
the process of European integration. At no other time has a country tried to
dissociate itself from the bloc in this way. The decision not only challenges
the Franco-German view of the European Union but also makes a compromise
extremely difficult and risky between France and Germany and the United
Kingdom.
Most important,
Cameron is framing his proposals not in terms of national sovereignty but in
terms of social well-being. In doing so, he acknowledges the social
implications of the European crisis. Cameron has even said that the European
Union currently is hurting its citizens more than it is helping them. According
to leaked portions of his upcoming speech, he believes that there is a
"growing frustration that the EU is seen as something that is done to
people rather than acting on their behalf" and that the issues are
"being intensified by the very solutions required to resolve the economic
problems."
The excerpts also cite
Cameron as saying "people are increasingly frustrated that decisions taken
further and further away from them mean their living standards are slashed
through enforced austerity or their taxes are used to bail out governments on
the other side of the Continent." This rhetoric could become highly
attractive in Europe, where people from Germany to Finland believe that
taxpayers' money is being used to bail out inefficient peripheral countries.
And many Greek, Spanish and Portuguese citizens probably would sympathize with
the notion that austerity is worsening their quality of life. Cameron's
rhetoric suggests that he is positioning the United Kingdom to be the leader of
a counternarrative that opposes Germany's view of the crisis.
But this strategy is
not without risks for the United Kingdom. In recent years, the country's veto
power in the European Union has been reduced substantially. With each reform of
the European treaties, unanimous decisions were replaced by the use of
qualified majority. Even in cases where unanimity is required, Berlin and Paris
have managed to bypass London when making decisions. For example, Cameron
refused to sign the fiscal compact treaty in 2011, but Germany and France
decided to proceed with it, even if only 25 of the 27 EU members accepted it.
Moreover, the
"enhanced cooperation mechanism," the system by which EU members can
make decisions without the participation of other members, increasingly has
been used to move forward with European projects. Currently, the EU's Financial
Transaction Tax is being negotiated under this format. In recent times, London
has been able only to achieve exemptions without real power to block decisions.
Meanwhile, the ongoing
crisis has compelled the European Union to prioritize the 17 members of the
eurozone over the rest of the bloc. This has created a two-speed Europe, where
core EU members integrate even further as the others are neglected somewhat.
London could try to become the leader of the non-eurozone countries, but these
countries often have competing agendas, as evidenced by recent negotiations
over the EU budget. In those negotiations, the United Kingdom was pushing for a
smaller EU budget to ease its financial burden, but countries like Poland and
Romania were interested in maintaining high agricultural subsidies and strong
development aid.
The dilemma is best
understood in the context of the United Kingdom's grand strategy. Unnecessary
political isolation on the Continent is a real threat to London. The more the
European Union focuses on the eurozone, the less influence the United Kingdom
has on continental Europe. The eurozone currently stretches from Finland to
Portugal, creating the type of unified, Continental entity that London fears.
For the British, this
threat can be mitigated in several ways, the most important of which is its
alliance with the United States. As long as London is the main military ally
and a major economic partner of the world's only superpower, continental Europe
cannot afford to ignore the United Kingdom. Moreover, London also represents a
viable alternative to the German leadership of Europe, especially when France
is weak and enmeshed in its own domestic problems. And even if the United
Kingdom chooses to move away from mainland Europe, its political and economic
influence will continue to be felt in the Continent.
The United Kingdom's
grand strategy has long been characterized by balancing between Europe and the
United States. Currently, London is not so much redefining that grand strategy
as it is shifting its weight away from Europe without completely abandoning the
Continent.
Εγγραφή σε:
Σχόλια ανάρτησης (Atom)
0 Σχόλια:
Δημοσίευση σχολίου
Σχόλια και παρατηρήσεις