Many citizens of France's 24 partners in the EU, or of states that aspire to enter the EU soon, are angry -- indeed, indignant -- at France's rejection of the EU's constitutional treaty. After the Dutch "no," there is fear that distrust of the European project will spread.
The French vote mainly expressed a rejection of the ruling class and deep anxiety about economic prospects. It was a vote of misery and desertion, an impulse moved by panic as well as anger.
But the size of the "no" vote also reflected the persistent lack of a clear explanation by our politicians of what the EU brings to Europeans in terms of wealth, competitiveness, social welfare and, of course, peace. Too often, our politicians disparage Europe and impute to it evils -- like unemployment -- that are really the result of domestic insufficiencies.
ILLUSTRATION: YUSHA
Like many in France, I do not believe that this thunderbolt means the end of Europe. We can and must react positively, and we can do so by returning to basics and offering to Europe's nations, including the French and the Dutch, new challenges and a new spirit.
First, let us express the undeniable facts about Europe's Union. Above all, Europe means peace. Peace was at the heart of the ambition of Europe's founding fathers. It returned as an animating and unifying force with the collapse of communism and the Balkan wars of a decade ago. Peace is also a living issue today, given global terrorism and Europe's unbreakable alliance with the US.
It is wrong to pretend that the risk of war is behind us. If Europe's vigilance breaks down, violent conflict will become a possibility once again. A united Europe can respond to these dangers in ways that no single state can. Moreover, no single state can weigh in on international negotiations and offer solutions to economic rivalries or trade issues that threaten to degenerate into political clashes.
Europe also inculcates democratic values. The Union helped countries in southern Europe overthrow authoritarian regimes in the 1980s, and helped countries in Europe's East become democracies in the 1990s.
EU enlargement is not only an economic duty to be borne by the richest nations; it is also the recognition of a common history and a shared culture. The wealthy West does not have the right to abandon this task, and it must welcome into the same community of destiny all democratic countries east to Russia if they meet EU criteria.
Europe also means prosperity and, for the countries that joined the EU recently or will join shortly, the promise of prosperity. All countries face, to different degrees, economic problems. But there is a model, simultaneously economic and social, that only Europe embodies. The European framework is exacting but necessary. It is as far from being a controlled economy as it is from resembling the libertarian anarchism that many French opponents of the constitutional treaty fear. It is a framework that is based on a discipline and solidarity within and between member states from which no one can be exempt.
To be sure, behind the union's great schemes lurks another EU that is excessively bureaucratic. But it also must be recognized that the EU built its success on its meticulous processes and ability to regulate economic life for the benefit of all. It was in this way that it radically transformed economies and societies for the better.
Nor can we overlook the banal bargaining of European leaders, the quarrels over budgets and the rise of national egoisms whenever elections loom. True, such political infighting makes the EU appear as if it were no longer motivated by great and noble ambitions. Even the constitutional treaty, which should have been a clarion call for all Europeans, was allowed to become bogged down in minutiae. Indeed, today no European political figure of global stature offers an ambition that resonates.
So our task is to offer Europe a new foundation and a new impulse. We need founding fathers -- or mothers -- and nations moved by a clear understanding of their interests and a popular enthusiasm for integration. The road will be long. But we must be confident that we can move domestic politics to higher considerations.
Europe's academics, senior civil servants, business executives and trade unionists must work together to build a project that expresses a new frontier. If we are unable to build a new idea of and for Europe, all that Europe has achieved in the last 50 years will be put at risk.
Nicolas Tenzer is president of the Centre d'etude et de reflexion pour l'action politique in Paris and director of the journal Le Banquet.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Apart from the first arms sales approval for Taiwan since US President Donald Trump took office, last month also witnessed another milestone for Taiwan-US relations. Trump signed the Taiwan Assurance Implementation Act into law on Tuesday. Its passing without objection in the US Senate underscores how bipartisan US support for Taiwan has evolved. The new law would further help normalize exchanges between Taiwanese and US government officials. We have already seen a flurry of visits to Washington earlier this summer, not only with Minister of Foreign Affairs Lin Chia-lung (林佳龍), but also delegations led by National Security Council Secretary-General Joseph Wu
When the towers of Wang Fuk Court turned into a seven-building inferno on Wednesday last week, killing 128 people, including a firefighter, Hong Kong officials promised investigations, pledged to review regulations and within hours issued a plan to replace bamboo scaffolding with steel. It sounded decisive. It was not. The gestures are about political optics, not accountability. The tragedy was not caused by bamboo or by outdated laws. Flame-retardant netting is already required. Under Hong Kong’s Mandatory Building Inspection Scheme — which requires buildings more than 30 years old to undergo inspection every decade and compulsory repairs — the framework for
In A phone call between US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), Xi is reported to have stated that in his view, “Taiwan’s return to China” is to be considered an integral part of the post-World War II international order. Never mind that China under Xi has been trying to undermine the liberal post-war international order by setting up alternative organizations and schemes that are detrimental to freedom and democracy around the world. Its own repression of Tibet, Xinjiang and Hong Kong are vivid examples. The “return to China” is the biggest misnomer: Taiwan has never ever been part
President William Lai (賴清德) on Wednesday last week announced a plan to invest an additional NT$1.25 trillion (US$39.8 billion) in military spending to procure advanced defense systems over the next eight years, and outlined two major plans and concrete steps to defend democratic Taiwan in the face of China’s intensifying threat. While Lai’s plans for boosting the country’s national security have been praised by many US lawmakers, former defense officials, academics and the American Institute in Taiwan, the US’ de facto embassy in Taiwan, they were not equally welcomed by all Taiwanese, particularly among the opposition parties. Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman
RSS