In another bizarre twist in the Brexit saga, the British Parliament has signaled its acceptance of British Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s withdrawal deal with the EU, but has also decided there must be a general election on Dec. 12 before the deal can finally be ratified. EU leaders could be forgiven an ironic smile.
Even though opinion polls give Johnson’s pro-Brexit Conservatives a commanding lead as the campaign opens, they also indicate that a clear majority of British voters — larger than the one that backed “Leave” in the 2016 referendum — actually favors remaining in the EU.
However, EU leaders might want to contain their smiles. The EU’s biggest enemy is not euroskeptic hostility, but rather indifference. Although polls taken even before the Brexit referendum tended to show a majority for Remain, they also found that most Britons did not care about the EU one way or another. The question of EU membership simply was not a priority issue for most people. It was assumed that voters would select the less risky option and support Remain. In fact, their indifference put the referendum up for grabs.
As a result, random contingencies or the effectiveness of either side’s rhetoric had the potential to push the result over the line in either direction. In the event, immigration had become an especially potent issue in 2016, owing to media images of mass migration and refugee flows across the Mediterranean and the Balkans. For the “Leave” campaign, the EU’s failure to manage the crisis was a boon.
Yet when future historians look back at this episode, they will probably conclude that there was an ocean of apathy between two sets of hardcore true believers on each side of the European question. Britain had always been a semi-reluctant EU member state, so it did not take much to tip the balance slightly in favor of leaving.
The key moment came when then-British prime minister David Cameron, driven by political dynamics within the Conservative Party, made the fateful decision to hold a referendum on the issue, amid the economic and political stress of the long recession that followed the 2008 global financial crisis.
Ever since the establishment of the European Economic Community (the precursor to the EU) in 1957, Britons have had a rather detached, sometimes even condescending, view of European integration. This remained the case even after the UK’s accession to the bloc in 1973, and even after a significant majority of British voters affirmed EU membership in a referendum in 1975. For the British, being a part of “Europe” was a transactional relationship, not a marriage of love.
By contrast, the countries that suffered the most from two world wars and German occupation during World War II (France, the Netherlands, Belgium and Italy) have always had deeper, more sentimental reasons for supporting the EU. The specter of war features prominently in these countries’ collective memory, even among younger generations that were born long after peace had been secured.
However, even continental Europeans’ commitment to the European project should not be taken for granted. This month, the think tank Friends of Europe published an opinion poll based on interviews with more than 12,000 respondents across the 28 EU countries and found that 60 percent of respondents “aren’t sure they would miss the EU if it were gone.”
That result should chill the bones of all EU leaders.
Predictably, the share of British respondents who are not sure if they would miss the EU is 63 percent. However, a staggering 72 percent of French respondents feel the same way, as do 67 percent of Italians and 60 percent of Germans. On this evidence, the EU’s biggest problem is that citizens simply take it for granted, and do not particularly care whether it thrives or fades away.
This problem might reflect a failure of communication. After all, a supranational bureaucratic entity comprising an endless array of directorates, agencies and committees was always going to find it hard to be loved, or even to explain what it does and why it exists.
However, the bigger problem is that the EU struggles to make quick, clear, and ambitious decisions. It has a far easier time saying no than yes. It is a lot better at defusing conflicts among members than it is at mustering collective action in the interest of clearly defined shared objectives.
This was not always the case. The launch of the euro in 1999 was a big, clear, epochal moment, following a major political decision and the successful implementation of many technical measures.
However, since then, things have not gone well when it comes to the one issue that most concerns ordinary voters: the eurozone’s effectiveness at creating jobs and ensuring rising living standards. Nowadays, the euro elicits reluctant acceptance, not passion and conviction.
The slogan of Britain’s famed Special Air Service is, “Who Dares Wins.” However, in the case of Brexit, one could adapt it to say, “Who Cares Wins.” In the run-up to the 2016 referendum, pro-EU forces failed to make enough Britons care about EU membership.
Perhaps that would change during the general election campaign, but it would be risky to bet on it. Proponents of the EU across the other member states should take note. Indifference is their greatest enemy.
Bill Emmott is a former editor-in-chief of The Economist.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) trip to China provides a pertinent reminder of why Taiwanese protested so vociferously against attempts to force through the cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014 and why, since Ma’s presidential election win in 2012, they have not voted in another Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate. While the nation narrowly avoided tragedy — the treaty would have put Taiwan on the path toward the demobilization of its democracy, which Courtney Donovan Smith wrote about in the Taipei Times in “With the Sunflower movement Taiwan dodged a bullet” — Ma’s political swansong in China, which included fawning dithyrambs