“Czech govt wants country to ratify Lisbon treaty by year’s end” reports Ceskenoviny.cz (23 September 2009).
So would every other government in the EU member states, and so would 26 national parliaments, which have approved the Lisbon Treaty. So would the EU institutions, which should be up and running, with a new Commission from 1 November 2009.
The problem is that acting Prime Minister Jan Fischer offers no solution to this Czech constitutional problem, which holds Europe hostage.
Is hand-wringing all we can expect from the Czech Republic?
***
Vaclav Klaus
Czech President Vaclav Klaus must have an objective for his disregard for Czech and European parliamentary democracy.
David Cameron and his foreign policy supremo William Hague hold out the long term promise of a revocation of the United Kingdom’s ratification of the Lisbon Treaty, after a Conservative victory in the next general election.
But more immediately, Klaus and his fringe of supporters can try to dispirit the Irish voters ahead of the Lisbon II referendum.
Ireland has been promised a Commissioner, if the Lisbon Treaty enters into force. If Klaus and his henchmen are allowed to make their country the laughing stock of Europe and ridicule the purposes of the rest of Europe, some Irish voters may lose hope.
***
Clearer alternatives
Clear decisions are needed in the Czech Republic before the Irish referendum.
Ireland needs to return a ringing Yes vote in the face of the insidious plots of Klaus and the Tories.
If the Lisbon Treaty is delayed or falls, a new and closer union becomes a necessity.
Ralf Grahn
Thursday, 24 September 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Subscribe To Grahnlaw
Posts
Comments
"If the Lisbon Treaty is delayed or falls, a new and closer union becomes a necessity."
ReplyDelete-
What your conviction that a closer union will be necessary is based on?
Citizen of Europe,
ReplyDeleteWhen we look at the world, and how it is evolving, a stronger European Union would be in the interest of EU citizens and it could be a force for good in world.
This would require a real foreign policy and some other enhanced powers, but they need to be based on the citizens, which leads to a European federation.
The present treaty reform process, restarted in 2000, shows how difficult it is to advance, when every amendment has to be agreed unanimously and every country has to ratify the amending treaty.
If the present treaty reform attempt fails because of a few parochial member states, it would be the wrong answer to be left stranded with the Treaty of Nice.
It is better to have a smaller union (federation), if it is effective and democratic, than to sit waiting for the most narrow-minded member states to mature.
They can join the federation if they ever evolve.
I hold the same meaning about desirable direction of progress. I believe too that it is better to establish a federation in few members than to wait for anti-unionist states, and other things. But you misunderstood my question or maybe I misunderstood what you wrote. You wrote that after fall of the Lisbon Treaty a new union will be necessary. I understood it that if the mentioned treaty will not come into force a federal union will be an only solution for Europe's future and immediately after fall of the treaty such union will have to begin to be prepared (with other words: either the Lisbon Treaty or a new closer union). I was surprised because if it would be valid, the antifederalists would support the Lisbon Treaty for dear life (to avoid possibility that a federation would arise instead of it).
ReplyDeletecitizen of Europe,
ReplyDeleteI am not absolutely sure that I understood you correctly, but I doubt if many member states would be ready for a real federation in the short term.
The more integrationist countries would possibly want to move quickly, so they might establish a new union on a ready made Constitutional Treaty, but with some improvements, for instance with more effective foreign and defence policies and enhanced economic policy in order to safeguard the common currency. There would have to be improved parliamentary scrutiny in these areas.
After putting the first treaty in place, they would hopefully embark on a new round of reform.
An EU superstate is the dream. Not that different from all the European despots in history. EU=bloodshed delayed.
ReplyDeleteOldrightie,
ReplyDeleteEuropean history is a fascinating subject, replete with examples of how despots have caused suffering and set back progress at all levels.
The European Union is strikingly different, peaceful integration instituted by democratic states, for good reasons.