Blogs ARTE TV :: Leurope_en

Tous les sites d'ARTE :

L'Europe en débat

Le blog L'Europe en débat, fruit d'un partenariat entre ARTE et le Collège d'Europe, parie sur la force du débat pour imaginer l'avenir de l'Europe. Il aborde en français et en anglais l'actualité européenne sur une base thématique. Son équipe, composée d'étudiants, d'assistants et de professeurs du Collège, privilégie dans ses analyses la comparaison, la mise en perspective et le recul. Elle vous invite à participer à cette réflexion collective via les commentaires. Elle cherche ainsi, à dégager des intérêts communs aux citoyens européens en dépassant les intérêts nationaux, préalable à la constitution d'une opinion publique européenne.

Partenaires associés

Les sites incontournables

Europa, le portail de l'Union européenne

EUobserver

Eurotopics

Centre for European reform (CER)

Notre Europe

Mouvement Européen France

European Council on Foreign Relations

Dans la blogosphère

Coulisses de Bruxelles, UE

The blog of the Centre for European Reform

blogs@eliamep

Blogactiv

Whatseuropinion, un blog bilingue d'un groupe d'anciens du Collège d'Europe

Technorati

La oreja de Europa, un blog en espagnol ayant reçu recemment un prix pour sa communication sur l'Europe

Debates and documentation on European culture and history

Europe's World

signandsight.com : Let's talk European

European Navigator, un site remarquable du CVCE sur l'histoire de la construction européenne

Turquie Européenne

Energie : politique, environnement, lobbies

Cap sur Copenhague : un dossier de Touteleurope.fr

Climate change: The road to Copenhagen - An Euractiv dossier

Profil

Nom d'auteur : Luis Bouza Garcia

Description : Je suis l'assistant académique du programme d'Études générales européennes du Collège d?Europe

Are we all Irish?

Three years after the double rejection of the Constitutional Treaty by French and Dutch voters, European efforts to advance the Reform Treaty have suffered another severe blow by popular vote – thus putting an end to ten years of fierce institutional debates.

As many Euro-analysts and commentators have shown in the last days, the temptation to blame the Irish people and isolate the Irish Government is omnipresent. How often have we heard the fallacious argument that it is unfair, or even undemocratic, for half a million people to take into hostage the daily lives of half a billion European citizens?

As long as there is not a European people and therefore a European constituency, this question will remain deprived of any legal, political or democratic foundation. Without legal foundation, because sovereignty still lies within the Member States, which have to agree on the European project according to the prescriptions of their constitutional order. In the Irish case, any change to the national constitution needs to be endorsed by a direct consultation of the Irish people. Without political foundation, because imposing such a fundamental document to an unwilling people is the best way to ensure reluctance, challenge and non-compliance. Furthermore, the decision of other countries which previously rejected the Constitutional Treaty by referendum has not been contested. Moreover, should a referendum have been held in another EU Member State, would the result have been fundamentally different? Without democratic foundation, because the Irish choice was unambiguous (high voter turnout, clear victory of the “no”) and based on serious concerns that need to be listened to, not despised. It is both naïve and illusionary to believe that, with a little bit of education, Irish citizens are going to turn back to the ballot boxes in two or three years time and massively approve what is convenient for the rest of the Member States. Nevertheless, given their quasi unanimous pressure and calls for the continuation of the ratification process, a scenario where Ireland votes again with a number of “clarifications” may very well become reality.

Much ink will be spilt analyzing the particular reasons behind the Irish vote – be they sociological, populist, economic or domestic. At this early stage, two major causes can be pinpointed that also account for the double rejection of the Constitutional Treaty by France and the Netherlands: the growing disenchantment towards Europe and the broader crisis of representative democracy.

First, Europe is no longer a dream for many citizens. It has merely become a complicated and distant rule-setter. Be it myth or reality, the enthusiasm of the early ages sparked by Franco-German reconciliation and the euphoria of peace are long gone. Part of this can be attributed to the mere effect of time – Europe is no longer a passionate project, it is an everyday reality that necessarily implies disappointments. But there is something more to that: European citizens lack a common project to adhere to. Some have been suggested but did not mobilize citizens – the Lisbon agenda – or even backfired –enlargement or the euro.

Second, many citizens do not feel properly represented. This crisis of representativity is deeply rooted in modern political cultures and goes beyond European politics. Many arguments that have been put forward to account for this mistrust between the citizens and their leaders do not hold a critical historical assessment. For instance, the so-called sociological gap between the “ordinary people” and the “educated elite” conveniently ignores the fact that democracy has always been monopolised and driven by a privileged few who could dedicate time and money to public affairs. Brussels in this regard is no different from Athens or Rome yesterday, or from Berlin and London today. The novelty pertains to the fact that politicians’ leadership is no longer blindly accepted. Nowadays citizens’ tend to build their opinion individually.

This is to say that the Irish decision reflects a real malaise and should not be discarded as “an incident”. Instead, we should rather proceed to an in-depth reflection on the kind of Europe we want. There are but two ways out.

We can build Europe not against but without the citizens – at least for topics where their approval does not add value. This solution, which has driven European integration until Maastricht (1992), is nowadays too swiftly cast aside. Indeed, much of what Europe does is of regulatory and highly technical nature, the equivalent of which does not require public endorsement within Member States. Even the Reform Treaty made changes that were, for the most part, technical institutional arrangements rather than significant modifications to the scope and objectives of the EU. Why should European citizens be directly consulted on a treaty reform when Dutch or French citizens are not consulted on constitutional reforms? Why should Europe be more democratic than its Member States?

Or we can try to involve the citizens, and attempt to make Europe, and politics in general, more accessible and more interesting. More specifically it is essential that Europe and European issues become an integral and continuous part of domestic political discourse and not just occasionally flaring up when issues of institutional reform are put on the table. This is perhaps the only means of familiarising the public with European issues and divesting them of their alien and perhaps threatening character. . It will be a long journey to undertake, the outcome of which is anything but guaranteed. But in the long run it is not a journey that Europe can afford to avoid.

FIND OUT MORE

Hubert Védrine prévient dans Le Monde du 19 juin 2008 qu’"Il est urgent d'éviter de nouveaux bricolages institutionnels", tout en rappelant qu’il n’y a pas de sortie de crise évidente et que l’intégration européenne dépend avant tout de la volonté politique.

Jean-Claude Juncker dans Libération du 19 juin 2008 fait part de ses inquiétudes avec sincérité à Jean Quatremer.

Cowen says Ireland 'faces uncertainty'.

Several alternatives have been considered before the meeting of the European Council, however, as EUobserver puts it, there is no obvious way out.

Luis Bouza García (Spain)

Stephen Coutts (Ireland)

Mathieu Rousselin (France)

Rédigé par Luis Bouza Garcia | Actualités | Commentaires (3) | | +

Le 19/06/2008 à 23:58

Commentaires

1 - Le 25/06/2008 à 17:26, par Julio Embid ( )

Hello Bou&Friends, you know when a government does a referendum they can ask something and people can answer what they wish. So, sometimes I have said than I voted YES in the Spanish referendum about the European Constitution and if I will be French instead of Spaniard, I'd voted NO in the French referendum, to the same question. Coherently The problem of acadamics and students of european politics is that you think irish people voted thinking in Lisbon Treaty and in their own interests as european citizens. But you don't care about local politics, the struggle of Irish parties, and the critical vote against the government which is more important than the european views. So don't worry for the irish because we can pay in euros, if they voted yes or not. The European Union is a currency union and not more. There are millions of people who see every day the policies of their towns and don't know where the EU is or what EU does. Many greetings and I hope you can understand my first english message

2 - Le 26/06/2008 à 13:47, par Luis

Don't worry Julio, your message is perfectly understandandable. Usually you are completely right, when you point out that one has to admit that most voters do not act as European citizens but rather thinking of national politics. And again you are right, that most of them perceive the EU as a monetary and not political Union. However that's not true, extremely sensitive political decisions are taken at the EU level every day. And that's why politicians should struggle to make citizens aware that "real politics" is made in the EU, and that they can have their voice heard. In the case of Ireland, your argument is not true, as a majority of the no voters tended to agree with the government on national politics, but wanted to avoid giving sovereignty to the EU. Greetings!

3 - Le 15/07/2008 à 00:05, par Pedro Garrido ( )

For having more links between europeans citizens and their representatives we need strong europeans political parties with european leaders. In Belgium there arent common political parties and its future, like a political union, is every day more difficult. In modern democracies, without parties there arent representation and democracy is only a word without real sense. European parties should have a candidate for the European Comission President before the next next year election. Then, europeans citizens could compare differentes projects identified with different leaders, and we wil know what we are voting for.

Ajouter un commentaire

[ + ] Le contenu de ce message est suspect ? Vous pouvez nous le signaler ...

Mon blog

L'Europe en débat

Rubriques

Billets récents

Médias

Archives

Amis

Liens

Profil

Commentaires

Ajouter un commentaire