So, the European elections are upon us. Except, of course, no one really cares, do they? After all, no one really knows what it’s all about. We, the apathetic Jo Public Europeans, are not really that bothered about what goes on in Brussels, are we? They can elect whomever they like…
Well, as a political opinions go, that's really, really STUPID!! But I suppose the European Union has a bit of an identity problem. Why should anyone be bothered about it?
This is a little difficult to answer, at least simply. Perhaps it is better to understand what the EU is. Under the pretext of removing trade and creating closer political union, the first six countries that formed the EU set about removing the blockages that caused friction (and wars) in the European continent. They simply pooled their steel and coal resources. By trade these historical adversaries were linked with a customs union. Over time such laudable aims as 'free trade' were freely adopted by neighbouring states that quite rightly recognised the thick soupy whistle of an approaching gravy train.
Just like any large institution, this union has required governance in order that its membership (last count over 500 million) is truly represented at leadership, intergovernmental, supranational and the on-the-ground pragmatic levels. Over the years these instruments have served it well just as it has served others ill – for example, the dreaded and notorious Common Agricultural Policy. For many, however, these necessary layers of governance have appeared opaque at best, at worst underhanded. Isolationist tendencies within each country have seen in ‘Europe’ an insidious coiled dragon with busybody talons digging ever-deeper into every aspect of their cherished lives, whether that be through ensuring the straightness of bananas, or the forbidding of lollipop ladies’ lollipops with Stop Children written on them, or the banning of church bells or the outlawing of mushy peas (each of which, it turns out, are complete lies made up by the British press). Such isolationists are typified by the likes of Britain’s UKIp party that states, on its website, that 75% of all laws are now made in Brussels.
That such rubbish is readily swallowed by some EU citizens says more about the wish fulfilment of Little Englanders, or their national equivalent elsewhere: they want to believe the devil is hiding under the bed and will use any evidence, even the made up storybook tabloid kind, to affirm a bunch of prejudicial beliefs. So, many in the UK will vote UKIp in the upcoming elections, childishly choosing to believe that everything about Europe is bad, bad, bad. The irony of an anti-EU vote in a free EU vote will, no doubt, elude them, just as conversely the irony in Russian voters in Ukraine eastern cities choosing to join with mother Russia where they will no longer have the opportunity to freely vote may also elude them. For it seems UKIp’s sole appeal appears to be in popular discontentment, and is therefore a negative message. One need only examine any of the 'philosophy' beneath surface level to come to that easy realisation.
But the EU unquestionably does have an image problem for some. It is a complex organisation because it represents a lot of things. Take the accession of countries as one example. The EU expanded from the six founding and independent nations (Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Italy, Germany and France) to 28 member states, including 8 former Soviet-bloc and former-communist countries in 1994 (Czech Republic, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia), Bulgaria and Romania in 2007, and the newest member, Croatia, in 2013. It therefore has to represent all of those countries, including their relationships with other countries in and out of Europe. It doesn’t take a genius to see that for simplicity's sake the unification of Europe is one of its unstated aims. But there’s a long way to go from idea to fulfilment, particularly when one considers its history of power.
Over the years the European Union has been a hapless beast. It frothed and floundered when in the 90s the ex-Yugoslavian states flared into bloody internecine feuding, promptly calling on its ‘elder brother’ the United States and its henchman NATO to crush the far-right nationalist ambitions of the Serbian leadership. In 2011, and under the auspices of UN Security Council Resolution 1973, a coalition of EU national forces and NATO flew sorties against targets in Gaddafi's Libya. That was considered a success, but it is a long way from the idea of planes with EU flags on them controlling the skies in the name of all things Brussels. Maybe those days are coming, but for now the primary work of the EU is in ensuring that everything economic, political and cultural is hunky-dory. It has had mixed success. Whilst the first is in trouble, the second has fared better and third thrives. The blue flag with yellow stars that flies from the Reichstag in Berlin, the Berlaymont in Brussels and the UNESCO building in Paris all the way to the distant four corners of this new empire reminds onlookers of an idealised beast. It is a strange chimerical creature, full of strange political concepts and strange forms of government: and we are not very clear about what it all means. Perhaps the following test will highlight our rueful knowledge of this new empire of which we are a part. So, in ten words or less, describe what is meant by the:
- European Parliament ________________________________________________
- European Council ________________________________________________
- Council of the European Union ________________________________________________
- European Commission ________________________________________________
And I was being kind: the list above does not include bodies such as the European Central Bank, the Courts of Justice of the European Union, the Court of Auditors, UNESCO, and more than 40 other agencies. Clearly there is still a little work to be done if we are to become more familiar with the orchestrations of European governance. It appears so labyrinthine, and its processes so complex, that few understands it, fewer still feel proximity, and who knows how many have a sense of ownership.
As with any centralised power, we must, of course, remain watchful. Citizens of empires should always exercise caution, even when they give power to central authorities through the ballot box. The European Union, like the United States, China, and the proposed ex-Soviet Eurasia, is a collection of small states that together have made up a bigger economic and political union. It is in the nature of united powerful bodies to seek two things: to maintain their power, and to gain even more power. Thus, all of the political unions previously mentioned have impacted on their surrounding regions of the world with their turbulent power.
The long reach of American power has long been felt in Central and Southern American revolts, assassinations and wars, the end result of which has been the present day unchallengeable imperial America that dominates the Western hemisphere. It now seeks political hegemony beyond.
Post-Mao Chinese power took longer to consolidate, where it chose to focus on seeking political affiliations on a wider field (Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean, South-East Asia) in order that any up-coming moves to unify Taiwan would be legitimized and supported. Theirs is a slightly longer agenda that also involves being ‘elder brother’. China has sought to implement the old imperial dominance model by which it brings into line all of the ‘little brother’ regional states bordering the mother country under the banner of harmony.
Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russian power has yet to be properly realised. To beat up the Georgians in 2008 is one thing, but beyond the scope of turning off the European's gas tap their power has yet to be properly tested. One wonders if the present situation in Ukraine is something Putin is doing, or is having done to him.
By comparison, the EU is an unknown force. It is good at pouring money into arts and entertainment, and bailing out its members when they can't pay their bills, but will the instruments of politics and organisation ever become the sharpened point of projected power in the same way the other powers mentioned have seen fit? Will columns of tanks roll under a European flag? Or will Europeans forever spend their way out of trouble?
With all of this in mind, and with regard to the elections, perhaps Europeans should elect whomever they like, yet with a caution. Europe has always needed direction, but only of the kind given by its citizenry through the ballot box. Therefore, the real thing to do, on 22nd May 2014, the European Parliamentary Election Day, is to get out there and vote. And here are two good points in favour: firstly, that all Europeans are properly able to freely vote (even against themselves), and secondly, that democracy in the European superstate is still alive and well. The accuracy of both of those statements could, of course, be challenged, but it would be stretching credulity to breaking point to believe political freedoms are absent from the EU. You, Mr & Mrs European, can elect representatives whose job it is to make better laws for everyone. Could someone please tell that to Nigel Farage...
I am an unabashed Europhile. I believe that more involvement, not less, is the way ahead. That Europe is now a place of tolerance, of freedom, of choice and the rule of law is the realisation of beautiful ideas voted into reality: that these ideas still need a little more fine-tuning is another reason to vote. So, instead of tu-tutting behind a piece of sensational anti-European hack journalism that seeks attention like a hyperactive child, we should calmly exercise a right to put people in power that can make a difference to us all and improve our lot in Europe. You can't do that by sitting at home, or by shouting from the outside. Vote for your future!
Comments