There is still so little material on the web pages of Libertas after the 1 May 2009 congress in Rome that it is difficult for an outsider to evaluate this newbie political party.
Most of the congress was geared towards pontification from the podium, with little policy developed by the congress or its grassroots delegates.
Many of the “national delegations” looked like estranged individuals from the outskirts of national politics. It is difficult to assess how magnetic the papist undercurrent is, or how much it will mobilise voters.
The big catch of the congress was the guest of honour, Lech Walesa. Described by Wikipedia as a devout Catholic, Walesa is a legendary man of international stature: Founder of the Solidarity movement, Nobel Peace Prize winner and former President of Poland, the man of scores of orders, medals and honorary doctorates.
Walesa is a consummate communicator, and his speech made waves in the Polish media. No interpretation was given while he spoke in Polish, and a translation of his speech has yet to appear on Libertas’s web page.
Besides Walesa, there seem to be Libertas activists of national political stature in a few Central European countries, such as the Czech Republic, but there is a puzzling contradiction between their outspoken anti-integration policies and Declan Ganley’s professed pro-European opinions.
Here, too, we have to wait for speeches and translations to appear.
Ralf Grahn
Showing posts with label Congress. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Congress. Show all posts
Saturday, 2 May 2009
Tuesday, 7 April 2009
USA: Adopt Turkey and Mexico
Eurocentric of The European Citizen wrote a post called America, the 28th Member State? on President Obama’s support for Turkish membership in the European Union.
Eurocentric reacted to Turkish EU membership being spoken of as a US foreign policy tool and as a “feel good” gesture of reaching out to a country, without taking the obligations of membership into account. American media treatment of the question lacked comprehension of how the European Union works.
***
I have long ago given up hope with regard to US governments and public opinion.
The only new thing about Obama's invitation was that it was made by him, because all the American administrations I can remember have supported Turkey's entry into the European Union for reasons of US geostrategic interests.
It is hard to find even a flimsy pretext for Turkish entry being in the interest of the European Union.
Having been brought up to think that it is bad form to invite guests to your neighbour's party, I think the only way to make Americans realise the challenges is by reversing the situation:
This was the reason for yesterday’s post: Let the United States adopt Turkey and Mexico, with loud and clear endorsement from Europe.
To continue on this path, the US has clear advantages.
It is hard to enter the European Union. The accession treaty has to be concluded with all the member states (27), so each one has a veto. In addition, each one has to ratify the treaty allowing in a new member. Finally, constitutionally the European Union is not equipped even for its existing membership. It is neither effective enough nor democratic.
Compare this with the United States, which has a democratic Constitution of more than 200 years. Only two requirements regulate the acceptance of new states.
According to Article IV, Section 4, the United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican form of Government.
Article IV, Section 3, allows Congress to admit new States into the Union.
Piece of cake, compared to Europe.
***
In other words, if the United States of America wants to reach out and to serve its geopolitical interests, let it invite Turkey and Mexico as the 51st and 52nd states.
Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
Outreach between religions should resonate well in the United States and Turkey. Both are formally secular countries, but imbued by religion, and as such culturally compatible way beyond the potential of the European Union.
***
My challenge to readers is to argue for or against the United States adopting Turkey and Mexico as new states.
Ralf Grahn
Eurocentric reacted to Turkish EU membership being spoken of as a US foreign policy tool and as a “feel good” gesture of reaching out to a country, without taking the obligations of membership into account. American media treatment of the question lacked comprehension of how the European Union works.
***
I have long ago given up hope with regard to US governments and public opinion.
The only new thing about Obama's invitation was that it was made by him, because all the American administrations I can remember have supported Turkey's entry into the European Union for reasons of US geostrategic interests.
It is hard to find even a flimsy pretext for Turkish entry being in the interest of the European Union.
Having been brought up to think that it is bad form to invite guests to your neighbour's party, I think the only way to make Americans realise the challenges is by reversing the situation:
This was the reason for yesterday’s post: Let the United States adopt Turkey and Mexico, with loud and clear endorsement from Europe.
To continue on this path, the US has clear advantages.
It is hard to enter the European Union. The accession treaty has to be concluded with all the member states (27), so each one has a veto. In addition, each one has to ratify the treaty allowing in a new member. Finally, constitutionally the European Union is not equipped even for its existing membership. It is neither effective enough nor democratic.
Compare this with the United States, which has a democratic Constitution of more than 200 years. Only two requirements regulate the acceptance of new states.
According to Article IV, Section 4, the United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican form of Government.
Article IV, Section 3, allows Congress to admit new States into the Union.
Piece of cake, compared to Europe.
***
In other words, if the United States of America wants to reach out and to serve its geopolitical interests, let it invite Turkey and Mexico as the 51st and 52nd states.
Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
Outreach between religions should resonate well in the United States and Turkey. Both are formally secular countries, but imbued by religion, and as such culturally compatible way beyond the potential of the European Union.
***
My challenge to readers is to argue for or against the United States adopting Turkey and Mexico as new states.
Ralf Grahn
Labels:
Barack Obama,
Congress,
constitution,
enlargement,
EU debate,
EU politics,
Mexico,
new States,
religion,
Turkey,
United States,
USA
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)