|
|
|
|
THE ROVING
EYE
French-fried
Europe
By Pepe Escobar
It was indeed, in the end, a new 1789. But
this time, instead of royal heads rolling in
revolutionary fervor, the French masses
guillotined globalization, deregulation, free
markets, Thatcherism imported via Brussels, Polish
plumbers, Turkish taxi drivers, the French
president, the French government, the political
elites, the media - indeed, amid all the carnage
in this republican soft revolution, the Europe
Union (EU) was no more than collateral damage. To
top it all, in this massive ideological debate,
voting "non" was supposed to be pro-Europe: not
this one under construction, but "another" Europe.
Who profits from this political tsunami -
the "mother of Europe" rejecting the proposed
European constitution? The constitution was
supposed to lead the EU towards more democratic
practices, more efficiency and more power to face
global competition. With the Dutch electorate all
set on Wednesday to complete a one-two punch, one
might assume the document, a compromise reached
after five years of hard-fought negotiation, is
already six feet under.
The EU's disarray
is caviar for its global competitors - the US,
China and India. (The euro fell to a seven-month
low against the dollar on Tuesday, breaking below
key $1.2450 levels.) In the US, from conservatives
to neo-conservatives, from "grand chessboard"
proponents to preemptive war cheerleaders, all in
favor of divide and rule are delighted. Especially
because the debacle was chiefly the fault of
French President Jacques Chirac (aka "Europe's
dinosaur"). As a careless political opportunist,
Chirac never bothered to take the time to explain
to French voters what the EU's future was all
about. Thus he may have squandered the vision of
the EU as a serious counterweight to the US - just
when President George W Bush was learning how to
pronounce the words "European Union".
A
romantic reading of this event would reveal the
French as gallant warriors showing "another EU is
possible" to 450 million fellow Europeans. More
realistically, as a newspaper from Alsace put it,
"For a long time, the EU will be reduced to a free
market zone, to the great satisfaction of the US,
the UK and the new members from Eastern Europe."
Not to mention Iran, now facing the EU-3 (Germany,
France and Britain) nuclear negotiations conducted
by a French-fried Chirac, a Gerhard Schroeder
fighting for his political life and an embattled
Tony Blair. There was a time, in the late 1990s,
when Blair could look himself in the mirror as the
model leader for the future EU. Not after Iraq.
La vie en rose
The
French tsunami has been widely interpreted as a
battle between the nation-state and globalization.
It's not that simple. Many workers from China or
India - not to mention the US - would give an arm
and a leg to enjoy la vie en rose: only 35
hours of work every week, six weeks of holidays
every year, strong unions which call a nationwide
strike at a minute's notice, a fabulous health
system, abundant childcare, a very generous
welfare system, subsidies for privileged sectors
of the economy - not to mention that unlimited
supply of sublime bottles of wine and 365
different types of cheese.
There's a price
to pay for all this - other than high taxes: the
French alternative translates into a 10%
unemployment rate (25% among young people), slow
economic growth, and a decline in purchasing power
(largely because of the strong euro pushing up
prices). But huge swathes essentially voted "non"
because they can't conceive losing so many of
their privileges. The bottom line is that the
Anglo-Saxon "liberalizing" model is a bonanza for
a very limited class of already wealthy, basically
white, Western men, but not exactly adjusted to
increase social justice around the world. Any
other country in the same situation as France
would also be largely inclined to be against a
document that allegedly threatens their
egalitarian social model.
Some statistics
put it in perspective. According to a
specially-developed French computer program, the
word "bank" shows up 176 times in the
constitution's text; "market" 78 times;
"competition" 174 times; and "social progress"
only three times. "Fraternity" - a concept
embedded in the soul of France - is not even
mentioned. The "non" vote reveals textbook class
struggle: blue-collar workers (more than 80%
"non") against pale bureaucrats in navy-blue suits
("oui'). Paris (66%) and other cosmopolitan cities
- Lyon, Strasbourg (home of the European
parliament), Marseilles, Toulouse (home of Airbus)
- voted overwhelmingly "oui".
But the mass
rejection also reveals an uneasy coalition of
Stalinists, Trotskytes, neo-fascists,
protectionist farmers and young anti-globalization
activists. 52% of the nation stressed the current,
troubled "economic and social situation" as the
main reason for voting "non". This victory of the
extremes - right and left alike - could not but
leave people like former Socialist minister Jack
Lang (a moderate) appalled. Lang said that the
"great European project has to be led in France by
the left, based on the PS [the French Socialist
Party]. Now that base has exploded.
It
ain't over until...
On a pedestrian level,
the 25-member EU can still walk, thanks to the
universally-despised Treaty of Nice, approved in
December 2000. Prime Minister Jean-Claude Juncker
of Luxembourg, the current EU president, is
already on full damage control mode: he pledged to
do everything to keep the constitution on life
support at the next, crucial Council of Ministers
meeting in Brussels on June 16. Some more anarchic
souls even consider the "non" as a blessing in
disguise: "The euro will fall, relaunching the
economy in France, Germany, Italy, the
Netherlands", says an European Commission
diplomat. Another one insists, "The crisis is in
France. Not here in Brussels. We hit a stumbling
block. But the political integration goes on."
In fact, the night of the long knives may
last for months. If France has a lot of
soul-searching to do in terms of economic
modernization, Britain and Poland for their part
cannot offer lessons in social justice. There's no
easy path to reconciliation on the horizon. Blair
- not to mention the Poles and the Danes - is
already laying the groundwork to escape the
responsibility of holding his own referendum. A
"non" to the EU in France has nothing to do with a
"no" in Britain" and not much with a "nee" in the
Netherlands. But amid all the gloom, some EU
diplomats are trying to put on the bravest of
faces - insisting that one of the key attributes
of the EU is good crisis management.
Feverish speculation aside, there is
indeed a plan B in Brussels - as EU diplomats told
Asia Times Online. It consists in assuring a
maximum of "yes" supporters by November 2006: nine
EU countries have already said so - including key
members Spain (by referendum) and Germany
(parliamentary decision). The most pressing
problem is preventing Blair from calling off the
British referendum. Thus by the end of next year,
the EU may play out declaration 30 of the annex to
the constitution, according to which if
four-fifths have ratified or one or more members
had found "difficulties" on the way, the matter
goes to the European Council. So it's absolutely
imperative that among the EU-25 there are no more
than five "non" votes.
A "return of the
living dead" scenario may be on the horizon. If
three big countries vote "no" - France, Britain
and Poland, for instance - the constitution is
politically dead, but parts of it can be
resurrected. The EU-25 just have to select the
consensual parts and introduce them by agreement
or by a one-page treaty signed by all parliaments.
This means Europe proceeding at different speeds -
but with one crucial change: the Franco-German
couple may not be in the driving seat anymore.
So it's essentially back to square one:
national governments having to solve the EU mess.
There may be no constitution in 2006, but at least
European leaders may reserve themselves the right
- unanimously, of course - to adopt some
provisions. This is the heart of plan B. They may
also decide to appoint - for two-and-a-half years
- a president of the European Council in charge of
fast-forwarding political integration.
Juncker is a serious candidate. They may
also appoint Javier Solana as the EU's minister of
Foreign Affairs - the EU's global face, something
that Solana already incarnates. They don't need a
referendum for this, only an agreement between the
European Council, the European Commission and the
European parliament. And speaking of saving face,
especially in this, the EU's darkest hour: at
least when Bush or Chinese President Hu Jintao
want to call the EU in 2006, all they have to do
is dial Solana's number.
(Copyright 2005
Asia Times Online Ltd. All rights reserved. Please
contact us for information on sales, syndication and republishing.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
All material on this
website is copyright and may not be republished in any form without written
permission.
© Copyright 1999 - 2005 Asia Times
Online Ltd.
|
|
Head
Office: Rm 202, Hau Fook Mansion, No. 8 Hau Fook St., Kowloon, Hong
Kong
Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
|
|
|
|
