A Non-Lisbon Europe Debate: Where is this all Going?

[toxic avenger]

Now that the Lisbon Treaty campaign is more or less over, is it possible to coolly discuss the long-term implications of the European Union for sovereignty and for the structuring of international affairs? I have been disappointed by the debate on the Lisbon Treaty for its focus on the minutiae of the particular Treaty rather than on the long-term project it is another part of. Many 'No' campaigners have been at pains to emphasise their support for the European Union and for Ireland's membership thereof, which might go some way to explain the reluctance to question or debate the fundamental long-term strategy of European integration. I, on the other hand, openly oppose the European integration project, believing it to be an ill-thought out experiment based on grossly mistaken premises. I believe that an idealist world-view of international relations is being pursued, in which national sovereignty is to be replaced by a supra-national sovereignty, and that the centralisation of power is always going to be at the expense of local and regional self-determination. The 'one size fits all' approach is already being seen to affect some parts of Europe detrimentally while benefiting others. If Ireland needs interest rates to go one way, and France, Germany and Italy need them the other way, who will get the call? The democratic nature or otherwise of the institutions is here irrelevant to a degree, my view is that the project in itself is the flaw, the continued cession of sovereignty into institutions outside and above the state system is being done with little thought by those states as to the long-term consequences. The voluntary and limited cession of sovereignty to supra-national institutions is, in some cases, such as the International Criminal Court, not necessarily a bad thing. But it should not be done to anywhere near the extent that the very existence of a viable national sovereignty is being undermined. I believe that is what we are witnessing. The system of national states co-operating multilaterally has, over time, morphed into a system in which those sovereignties have been undermined and are being transcended. Integrationist ideology is pushing it.

In particular I'd like to ask others to comment on the realist/idealist debate, is the cession of sovereignty necessary to tackle cross-border problems? Are there really 'transnational' forces that have slipped through the Sovereign State system to operate outside it? If there are, is it a new thing, and is the sovereign national state really inadequate to deal with it? What is the fundamental long-term goal of the European integration project, and what political entity will we be a part of in one-hundred years time, assuming the project continues on course? And why is this European Union necessary?

NO LISBON DEBATING, or party hackery please. I just want to hear reasoned views on the long-term reality of the European Union and the state system.

[Trampas]

A Non-Lisbon Europe Debate: Where is this all Going?

Across the Bosporus by the look of things.......unless we are very careful (and militant).

[toxic avenger]

Well, there is certainly an issue as to the logical conclusion of the process in terms of geographic extent, plus the problem of defining where a degree of cultural homogeneity is so low as to make the process look unwieldy and un-natural. But I would concentrate, for the moment, on accepting the existing boundaries for arguments' sake, and questioning the wisdom of the process anyway. If we leave aside the issues of Russia and Turkey, what is the ultimate goal, at what point will the integrationist agenda be fully satisfied, and what purpose will it serve?

[Taibh]

Its becoming a monolith.

[toxic avenger]

And I would like to hear the view of pro-integrationists in particular, what do they ultimately envisage, and why would that be good?

[toxic avenger]

Does anyone have a view? Or is this thread pointless?

[Trampas]

Does anyone have a view? Or is this thread pointless?

Far from it. In fact I think it is an excellent thread topic, although I suspect that most of us are "punch drunk" on EU affairs just now.

[Universal_001]

I'd like to see a European Federation but thats not whats happening, the trend seems to be to pool powers into an unelected bureaucracy to escape political fallout for tough decsions at home

[toxic avenger]

I'd like to see a European Federation but thats not whats happening, the trend seems to be to pool powers into an unelected bureaucracy to escape political fallout for tough decsions at home

Why would you like to see a European federation, what would it involve? Leave aside the democracy or bureaucracy for the moment..

[dub006]

The euro is going to come under sever pressure in the next few years.

Some countries such as Ireland ,spain ,Italy are in a different stage of the economic cycle to other more powerful countries such as Germany.
Lowering interest rates for these countries would be the logical step right now,however it looks like they are set to rise.

If tax harmonisation comes in there will be less room for maneouvre.

The growth and stability pact will necessarily be broken by Ireland etc.


If the dollar and sterling decline further against the Euro this will have extreme negative consequences for Ireland.

Loyalty to the EU amongst the Irish people will then be severely tested.