Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

While we liberate Iraq, Europe is busy planning to enslave us
The Daily Telegraph ^ | April 3, 2003 | Ambrose Evans-Pritchard

Posted on 04/02/2003 3:13:48 PM PST by MadIvan

By the time the Iraqi crisis is over, it may already be too late for the Government to stop a political disaster in Europe. The European Union's first constitution will be a done deal, and, from what we have seen of the text so far, it will usher in a new order that overturns the governing basis of British parliamentary democracy for ever.

The EU will no longer be a treaty organisation in which member states agree to lend power to Brussels for certain purposes, on the understanding that they can take it back again. The EU itself will become the fount of power, with its own legal personality, delegating functions back to Britain. Draft Article 9 puts Brussels at the top of the pyramid. "The Constitution will have primacy over the law of Member States," it says.

The new order may also be irreversible. Article 46 stipulates that the terms of secession from the EU must be agreed by two thirds of the member states. In other words, one third can impose intolerable conditions [report, 3 April].

A number of fresh articles trickled out two weeks ago, just as the Iraq conflict was erupting, to create what amounts to an EU interior and justice ministry, known as Eurojust, in charge of a proto-FBI - Europol - with the power to launch raids across the EU [report, 19 March]. An EU attorney-general will be able to prosecute "cross-border crime" in British courts, a catch-all term that gives Brussels wider jurisdiction than the US Justice Department currently enjoys after 200 years of encroachment on state power.

Under a new notion called "shared competence", Brussels takes charge of virtually all areas of national life. Unless the EU chooses to waive its primacy, Westminster will be prohibited from legislating in public health, social policy, transport, justice, agriculture, energy, economic and social cohesion, the environment, internal and external trade, and consumer protection.

The EU will have the power to "co-ordinate the economic policies of the member states" and - showing some chutzpah given what happened over Iraq - "define and implement a common foreign and security policy, including the progressive framing of a common defence policy".

This is not exactly what protesters had in mind when they voted no to the euro in Denmark, and no to Nice in Ireland, or when they tore up Gothenburg in the anti-EU riots in 2001. But it was precisely these outbursts of popular dissent that prompted EU leaders, in December 2001, to launch a convention on the future of Europe.

Vowing to end secrecy in EU treaty talks and throw the process open to the "people", they summoned 105 "Founding Fathers" for a year-long brain-storming session in Brussels to redesign Europe's governing machinery. Instead of diplomats, the members were MEPs, as well as MPs and ministers from the EU's 28 current and future states.

The man chosen to shepherd the "people" and enthuse Europe's disenchanted youth was the lordly Valéry Giscard d'Estaing, who incarnates the elitism of the 1970s French establishment. It went downhill from there.

The two European Commissioners on his 13-member praesidium, France's Michel Barnier and Portugal's Antonio Vitorino, have used their inside position to hijack the drafting process and push through articles that go far beyond the proposals of the working groups that toiled through the autumn. Much of the constitution is being written by lawyers on loan from the commission. The "people" have become a sick joke.

Tony Blair was slow to see the threat. Downing Street at first dismissed the convention as a talking shop, but woke up when the French, Spanish, German and Italian governments gave it irresistible authority by appointing to it their foreign or deputy prime ministers.

The Government then fell back to a second self-deception, imagining that France and Spain would join Britain in blocking any major assault on national prerogatives. Peter Hain, Downing Street's man on the forum, confidently told reporters that the East Europeans would not give away freedoms so recently wrested from the Soviet Union.

None of this has happened. France has abandoned Britain, and her own historical attachment to a Europe where national capitals always have the whip hand over Brussels. They seem to be accepting federalism as the price of relaunching the broken Franco-German axis. As for the Spanish, they are silent.

So are the Poles, Czechs, Slovaks and others, who still have a gun pointed to their head. They know that Jacques Chirac could still try to sabotage their admission next year by calling a referendum in France. Those on the convention will soon become MEPs or Eurocrats themselves, and their salaries will jump by as much as 12 times, which concentrates the mind.

It is almost pitiful to read through the long list of amendments put up by Mr Hain. Britain is alone, supported by just a handful of lonely Euro-sceptics.

The Government still insists that this draft text is nothing more than a wish list. Once the convention wraps up its work in June, EU governments will have their say. They alone will decide what is in the second Treaty of Rome this December. Of course, Britain can veto any text it does not like. But equally, we all know that Labour is not going to destroy a six-year effort to place the Government at the heart of Europe. And there is always the implicit threat that 24 other states could create a new union, leaving Britain in an empty shell.

Mr Blair will win a few face-saving concessions. The meaningless term "federal" will be taken out of Article 1. A watchdog may be created to safeguard "subsidiarity". But in the end he will try to pretend that this monster is more or less what Downing Street wanted all along, even with its legally binding Charter of Fundamental Rights.

Only a referendum can stop it now - if the Tories have got the guts to fight for one.


TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; US: District of Columbia; United Kingdom; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: brussels; eu; eutopia; fourthreich; uk
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-85 next last
To: MadIvan
Ambrose Evans-Pritchard deserves a medal for the Whitewater work he did when he was assigned to Washington DC. He was the best. Christoper Ruddy seems to have gone over to the nutsy side, but Ambrose marches on.
41 posted on 04/02/2003 4:08:46 PM PST by gcruse (If they truly are God's laws, he can enforce them himself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
"What Blair and the East Europeans need is an "out", a better deal from the United States than the garbage being offered up in Brussels."

Good Idea, Any ideas on how a better deal might be structured?

42 posted on 04/02/2003 4:15:36 PM PST by DannyTN (Note left on my door by a pack of neighborhood dogs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
Judging by what you folks have done in Iraq in a fortnight, you would have Europe by the Brussel sprouts in three days max.

Chirac really, really needs a beating after which he ought to be sat atop the Eiffel Tower like a Christmas angel.

Your NAFTA=North Atlantic Free Trade Association indicates quo vadis, Nato answered--certainly not to Brussels.

Get Hans Blix to stop this EU nonsense stat--it's a dangerous source of greenhouse gas.

43 posted on 04/02/2003 4:17:26 PM PST by PhilDragoo (Hitlery: das Butch von Buchenvald)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN
Just offer NAFTA membership, formally. That will set the ball rolling. I recommend beginning with our Eastern European allies, such as Poland. Once a few Eastern European states jump on, so will we.

Regards, Ivan

44 posted on 04/02/2003 4:17:49 PM PST by MadIvan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan

Who in their right mind would willingly sign onto what can only become a civil war?

45 posted on 04/02/2003 4:19:00 PM PST by Jhoffa_ (Frodo sleeps with men...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: You Dirty Rats
When was the last French victory over Britain on British soil?

The Battle of Hastings?
46 posted on 04/02/2003 4:21:08 PM PST by Pukka Puck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
We cannot have Airstrip One assimilated by Eurasia! Join Oceania now!

;^)
47 posted on 04/02/2003 4:22:33 PM PST by headsonpikes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Batrachian
"Besides, in spite of the current love fest that we seem to be having with Tony Blair, he is still a far-left liberal and a globalist, or am I wrong?"

Maybe Blair has had an eye-opening epiphany after the latest traitorous French antics.

48 posted on 04/02/2003 4:30:58 PM PST by F16Fighter (Democrats -- The Party of Stalin and Chiraq)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Pukka Puck
Except the Normans were Vikings who had carved out some sizable chunks of France; they were not themselves French.
49 posted on 04/02/2003 4:35:36 PM PST by NovemberCharlie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
offer (European Allies) NAFTA membership, formally

I like that idea. I understand there are a lot of special interests in Europe which are getting subsidies that might be an issue. But if the choice is between:


50 posted on 04/02/2003 4:36:59 PM PST by DannyTN (Note left on my door by a pack of neighborhood dogs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
Make NAFTA into the "North Atlantic Free Trade Association"

With the side benefit that Mexico is not on the North Atlantic...
51 posted on 04/02/2003 4:37:56 PM PST by omega4412
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
Don't worry too much. If need be, the UK holds a big marker from the US. We would be pleased to liberate you, if necessary.

I think that the US should expand NAFTA to include the Coalition of the Willing -- so long as they are not in the EU.
52 posted on 04/02/2003 4:42:32 PM PST by No Truce With Kings (The opinions expressed are mine! Mine! MINE! All Mine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
Ivan, what are the arguments used for why Britain has to sign up? Is it supposedly trade?
53 posted on 04/02/2003 4:42:44 PM PST by Plutarch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
Well I can think of one good thing to come out of France and others surrendering their soveriegnty and becoming a new political entity called the European Union.

Only sovereign states are recognized by the UN. Not being a sovereign state, France and the rest of the euros would have to be first recognized by the UN. Then they could apply for membership as a new entity/state. Now here's the good part: That would leave the US and Britain as 2 of 4 of the permanent members of the security council. Which leaves France.......sucking air! (I like that part.)
54 posted on 04/02/2003 4:44:50 PM PST by navyblue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

Comment #55 Removed by Moderator

To: Plutarch
The argument in the refendum for us to join was precisely that: we were joining a trading bloc. No one said this was going to be the eventual outcome.

Therefore the EU is a swindle.

Regards, Ivan

56 posted on 04/02/2003 4:47:20 PM PST by MadIvan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
We should trade our unfriendly trading partners Canada and Mexico for our friends in Great Britain.
57 posted on 04/02/2003 4:53:44 PM PST by cp124
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NovemberCharlie
That explains why they spoke Norwegian, instead of French.
58 posted on 04/02/2003 4:55:15 PM PST by Pukka Puck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
It also helps that the Royal Armed Forces could kick the arses of all the Euroweenies combined before supper time. heh
59 posted on 04/02/2003 5:00:05 PM PST by Constantine XIII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
Two thirds for secession? This will eventually lead to war.
60 posted on 04/02/2003 5:06:51 PM PST by muslims=borg (Democrats=Bolsheviks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-85 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson