Skip to main content

Another Europe...

The latest release of public documents throws up the interesting story that Guy Mollet, the French Prime Minister of the time, suggested in 1956 that France and Britain form a Union.

The idea of France joining the Commonwealth- then an organisation of far more substance than it has today- was taken seriously at the time in London. France under the Fourth Republic was yet to develop the robust nationalism that has been the hallmark of the Fifth Republic. It is interesting to speculate what kind of Europe we would see today, had France moved so decisively into the British camp, rather than, as it turned out, building the bridges to Germany that ultimately became the Franco-German motor.

Arguably, a Franco-British deal would have simply reinforced the continuing bitterness against Germany, and perpetuated the divisions that caused the First and Second World Wars, Perhaps Germany would have quietly slipped into the Soviet orbit- a state of affairs that would have made a third world war all but certain.

I find it interesting to see how different the Europe of the 1950s actually was, and this gives me pause when I view the current state of the continent. Much of the comments about the current state of the European Union are based around the idea that it is a stable entity. In fact, I would suggest that the balance of power will not remain decisively with the original founders, and particularly not with the Franco-German motor as conceived after the abandonment of the Mollet inspired Franco-British Union.

The dramatic catch-up that the formerly captive half of the continent is now making is impressive- Estonia and Latvia are likely to achieve Scandinavian levels of wealth within half a generation, and even slower movers are comfortably outpacing the growth rates of the original six EEC members. Meanwhile the more sceptical tone of these new members has reinforced the position of the British- who championed their membership, in sharp contrast to the arrogant posturing of Jacques Chirac who diminished French influence spectacularly with a series of own goals.

British foreign policy has been to promote the Central Europeans, and they have been loyal to the UK as a fellow Atlanticist nation. However, there is growing frustration in the chancelleries of Central and Eastern Europe. Having just joined the EU, there is little patience for the "Better-Off Out" school of British politics, who are mostly regarded as demented loonies. David Heathcoat Amory's trip to Estonia to try to persuade the Estonians to veto EU entry was regarded with frank bemusement in Tallinn, for example.

There is a giant difference between regarding the idea of European co-operation as a positive, while being opposed to aspects of the Union and the way it conducts its business and being against membership of the European Union. There are major problems with the European Union, but leaving the organisation will not solve them, and will weaken Britain. By continuing to engage with those countries that share the British wish for genuine reform: Scandinavia and the CEE states not least, Britain can create its own motive force for a EU based on more liberal and free trade principles: the Single European act was an early example of British policies achieving major successes, with more allies now members, the UK ought to be developing things still further.

The one thing that we should not be doing is alienating our new allies in the East.

Therefore the comments of Liam Fox suggesting that Poland and Hungary should have their membership of NATO suspended are at best spectacularly ill-judged. They show a clunking understanding of the new geo-political realities in Europe- especially considering the sacrifices that have been made by their forces in Iraq: While the British military has reported 126 deaths; Italy, 33; Ukraine, 18; Poland, 18; Bulgaria, 13; Spain, 11; Denmark, six; El Salvador, five; Slovakia, four; Estonia, Netherlands, Thailand, two each; and Australia, Hungary, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Romania, one death each. Romania has also lost four service personnel in Afghanistan.

Frankly, David Cameron should fire him on the spot.

Next week Prime Minister Andrus Ansip of Estonia will be speaking at the LSE. His title: "The European Union: a positive view" underlines the fact that Anti-Europeanism in Britain finds no echo, even in the most free-market European State. Genuine Euro-scepticism, on the other hand, does find such an echo.

We do not know what the geo-political realities will be for Britain in fifty years time- but provocative stupidity like Liam Fox's comments can not be tolerated in any responsible party.

Comments

Tristan said…
I agree with almost everything in there.

Especially the point about the EU. I sometimes despair about the EU, but I vastly prefer the path of reform than simply leaving- it may come to the point where our interests are best served by leaving, but I think there is real possibility of liberal reform in the near to mid-term future.

Popular posts from this blog

Cicero ReDux

By Special Request of Baroness Scott and Mark Valladares... Cicero's Songs returns: bigger, longer and uncut.
October 1st marked the half way point of the Estonian Presidency of the European Union.  Perhaps for many people such an anniversary is of passing interest at best.  Yet the conduct of the Estonian Presidency is reinforcing just how forward looking and innovative the most northerly of the Baltic States has become.
Estonia is a country that wants to live in the future, and with its openness and innovation, that future seems a lot closer than almost anywhere else in Europe
It is not that Estonia does not “do” the past: the picturesque cobbled streets of old Tallinn have tourist crowds a-plenty enjoying the mediaeval architecture in an Indian summer of sunshine and blue skies.  The real point is that Estonia refuses to be a prisoner of its past. Lennart Meri, Estonia’s President in the 1990s- who spent years of his childhood in Siberia- once told me that the country had to conc…

The American National nightmare becomes a global nightmare

It is a basic contention of this blog that Donald J Trump is not fit for office.

A crooked real estate developer with a dubious past and highly questionable finances. he has systematically lied his way into financial or other advantage. His personal qualities include vulgarity, sexual assault allegations and fraudulent statements on almost every subject. 

He lost the popular vote by nearly three million votes.

He has, of course, been under criminal investigation practically since before he took the oath of office. The indictment of some of closest advisers is just the beginning. His track record suggests that in due course there is no action he will not take, whether illegal or unconstitutional in order to derail his own inevitable impeachment and the indictments that must surely follow the successful investigation of Robert Mueller into his connections with Russia.

However, all of that is a matter for the American people. 

It is also a matter for the American people that Trump is cheating…

In praise of off-shore tax havens

The last few years has seen a spate of "scandals" about the use of off-shore tax havens. The hacking and subsequent leaking of data about who does and does not hold assets in off-shore jurisdictions has become an old perennial in the British press, rather like the "COLD weather happens in winter and QUITE HOT weather happens in summer", whose alarmist capital letter laced headlines are such a lazy part of contemporary "journalism". 

The increasing sophistication of the hackers, whether Russian-inspired or not, has resulted in a steady trickle of information becoming a torrent. After the relatively filleted release of data in the so-called "Panama Papers", the data release of the "Paradise Papers" is even larger.  Of course, just natural curiosity dictates that the off-shore ownership, or even just "ownership", of assets is of general public interest.  Celebrities, from the Royal family to the cast of Mrs Brown's Boys, are …