English

Britain’s European Destiny

Dec 4, 2012 Tony Blair

Europe has disturbed and divided British politics for years. Now mainstream politicians from the governing party are openly making the case for Britain leaving the European Union, or radically changing its relationship with it – which may amount to the same thing – with the sympathy of some of our nation’s leaders and far wider support among the public.

LONDON –The toughest challenge in politics right now is resolving the tension between the best long-term policy and the best short-term politics. Nowhere is this tension clearer than in Britain’s debate over Europe.

Europe has disturbed and divided British politics for years. But this time is different. Now mainstream politicians from the governing party are openly making the case for Britain leaving the European Union, or at least radically changing its relationship with it – which may amount to the same thing – with the sympathy of some of our nation’s leaders and far wider support among the public.

The reason for this resurgent skepticism and hostility toward the EU is not hard to fathom. Europe is in crisis. The euro’s design flaw – an economic union motivated by politics but expressed in economics – has become manifest. Structural changes to economies that experienced a sharp fall in interest rates when they joined a Germany-dominated currency bloc now must be made quickly, in crisis, and without the luxury of devaluation.

We hope you're enjoying Project Syndicate.

To continue reading, subscribe now.

Already have an account? Log in

Support High-Quality Commentary

For more than 25 years, Project Syndicate has been guided by a simple credo: All people deserve access to a broad range of views by the world's foremost leaders and thinkers on the issues, events, and forces shaping their lives. At a time of unprecedented uncertainty, that mission is more important than ever – and we remain committed to fulfilling it.

But there is no doubt that we, like so many other media organizations nowadays, are under growing strain. If you are in a position to support us, please subscribe now.

As a subscriber, you will enjoy unlimited access to our On Point suite of long reads, book reviews, and insider interviews; Big Picture topical collections; Say More contributor interviews; Opinion Has It podcast features; The Year Ahead magazine, the full PS archive, and much more. You will also directly support our mission of delivering the highest-quality commentary on the world's most pressing issues to as wide an audience as possible.

By helping us to build a truly open world of ideas, every PS subscriber makes a real difference. Thank you.

Subscribe Now

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 15 Comments on this article

Celt Darnell Aug 14, 2014

This isn't the Prime Minster who promised us a referendum on the EU Constitution (i.e. Lisbon Treaty) and then broke his word is it?
This isn't the same Prime Minister who lied about weapons of mass destruction being in Iraq is it?
This isn't the Prime Minister whom half the world regards as a war criminal is it?
Who's next? Dr. Josef Goebbels?
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Deborah krupp Feb 11, 2013

So Europe’s flagship policy is listing dangerously. To save it, I believe, requires a kind of “Grand Bargain” approach, rather than incremental steps, with Germany agreeing, effectively, to some form of mutualization of debt, while the debtor countries carry out profound structural reforms, and the ECB stands fully behind the bargain. There are some signs that this may happen. Even if it does, Europe will suffer for some time to come.
Read more at http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/britain-and-its-potential-withdrawal-from-the-european-union-under-cameron-by-tony-blair#QpsByFhME6UjaoYR.99
This paragraph is the one we helped to create by cheaper goods and labor. We can not isolate ourselves but we need to come to some type of global base where we all play fair with goods and labor. Ok, I am dreaming!...But it is a good dream!
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
António Correia Jan 18, 2013

The Maastricht Treaty was announced as a "great leap FORWARD". Since then, only "FORWARD moves" have been allowed in the Maastricht-born "European Union" - mainly the creation of the "single currency" and the birth of a Eurozone with more and more states involved, according to their will and their capability of meeting the doubtful set of "Maastricht criteria" when joining the "single" currency area. Any move which may be seen as a "backward move" has been strictly forbidden, even if nobody can take for granted that this disunited "European Union" is moving forward to something that looks like the promised land. In fact, it is increasingly clear that this road is a "road to nowhere", besides being increasingly painful for more and more member states to go ahead, under the approach which has been adopted to "keep the markets calm" and "save the Euro" - while avoiding the appropriate fiscal transfers and resorting to lending under AUSTERITY constraints. In these days, the European Union is repeatedly following the recommendation: "Keep moving FORWARD, either slowly or rapidly, either jointly or at several speeds!".

Yes, as Paul Krugman recently said, "The Euro is a shaky construction". Besides ignoring the macroeconomic imbalances within the EU, in the "Maastricht criteria" for Eurozone membership as well as in the subsequent "stability" pacts, the Euro has been designed and confirmed – by Delors et al and followers – as a "single currency" instead of a (much more realistic) "common currency". Now, it is very clear that this was a very bad choice, namely because other components of Delors's dream are missing - such as a European budget amounting, at least, to some "3% [!] of the European GDP".

Two decades after the Maastricht Treaty, a COMPLETELY NOVEL EU TREATY is mandatory - not a mere set of "positive" , incremental amendments -, so as to avoid a sad situation, in the near future, where the foreseen "European common home" becomes replaced by a true "European house of correction". We need to build a true European Union through a cooperative European disunion, where the Euro survives as a "common", parallel currency - INCLUDING FOR THE UNITED KINGDOM and the other nine "non-Euro states" - but no longer as the "single currency" for a fraction of the EU (currently 17 out of 27 member states)

[ http://building-a-true-european-union.blogspot.com ]:

” – The Euro should be a COMMON currency within the future EU – including the EU27 members outside the current ‘Euro Area’ – but not necessarily the SINGLE currency.
- In this context, the coexistence of TWO parallel currencies should be allowed in each EU member state (under certain conditions, established in a novel European Treaty), within the framework of an appropriate “Cooperative European Disunion” .
- Besides the “Common Euro”, the complementary currency in each member state could be either a “national currency” (…) or a completely new currency, shared by that member state and some other “compatible” EU member states, taking into account both the relevant macroeconomic issues and appropriate geographic, historic and cultural issues.”
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Kaleem Alam Dec 15, 2012

Dear TB, Britain never whole heartedly entered the European project. The media skeptics always portrayed themselves (British) different from mainland Europe rather close to Canada and US. The EU project could have been different if UK was in the project whole heartedly. And secondly if EU would have stood on its principles (idealism) it would have been different, but instead over the period it became a “Christian club”. Giving preferential treatment to Greece to become a member knowing the published books are wrong, while keeping Turkey at bay, was indeed its greatest mistake and it is paying for it today. You are right it was “Realpolitik”.

It is in UK’s hand, it has the opportunity to give a sense of direction and exert its diplomacy and bring the warring factions diplomatic and financial situation into a united union. On the other hand it has full right to walk away; similarly the EU would have full right to take decision which may not be that friendly or neutral to UK.

But Mr. Tony, Is it possible for Europe as union along with UK & US to forgo the pending interests of each other and to have interest-free aid (loan)? Perhaps this benevolent act may kick start the western economy, an act of generosity from usurers? If it does I am very certain the Europe would witness tremendous growth soon. I am a great admirer of EU project, it is indeed great and unique.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Patrick Lietz Dec 6, 2012

I agree wholeheartedly with the arguments developed in this article.

There is just a monumental chasm between these thoughts and the views expressed in newspapers and the British populace in general.

Most British wish to leave, because "splendid isolation" is a reminder of the good old days, when everything was better and the economy was running more smoothly.

I am convinced that the anti-European sentiments are only going to grow stronger and that Britain will ultimately leave the EU. My assumption is that feelings of disenfranchisement because of economic hardship and a lack of democratic participation with regards to the EU bureaucracy will leave Cameron no choice but to call for a referendum as a means to win the elections and to hold UKIP at bay.

Such an outcome would be disastrous, particularly for Britain. But the described scenario is not as unlikely as it seems. I personally would give it a 25% chance for it to occur.
- Celt Darnell Aug 14, 2014
  
  Try 100%,
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Alexander Stingl Dec 5, 2012

Europe, a disturbance of the force. Indeed, this is precisely how many British politicians, lobbyists, interest groups, and a large number of the British public seem to view Europe. In Britain, unlike its Continental European counterparts, the political-business elite does not merely cater to media and voters in this regard but actually does believe in the same values, just like the American Republicans believe in the fetish of 'less government' and mean no government (oblivious to the fact that spells a special brand of either anarchy or authoritarianism) - at least. It is because of that, and the subsequent politics of obstructionism by British politicians in the European processes of governance that the actual question is not whether or not the British should decide to remain in the EU, but it is for the rest of Europe to decide that, actually, we do not need the British and that it is the British obstructionism in European affairs and not the European disturbance of British affairs that has for quite some time and is also currently keeping us from creating governance solutions for the problems of the present and the future.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Kim Eakin Dec 5, 2012

My goodness what a pretty load of nonsense. Typical Tony Blair I must say.

"So Europe’s flagship policy is listing dangerously. To save it, I believe, requires a kind of “Grand Bargain” approach, rather than incremental steps, with Germany agreeing, effectively, to some form of mutualization of debt, while the debtor countries carry out profound structural reforms, and the ECB stands fully behind the bargain."

I am not sure what dimension Tony lives in, But in the one I occupy, known as REALITY, there is effectively ZERO chance that will happen. So, the rest of the tripe laden article is pretty words. Go back to Palestine Tony, they were real impressed with your pretty words weren't they.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Carol Maczinsky Dec 5, 2012

Let's face it, when Britain leaves the EU the fragmentations in British society break up: Scottish secession. Immigration. Social struggles.
- Celt Darnell Aug 14, 2014
  
  Yes, yes, you lot said that about our not joining the Euro.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Carol Maczinsky Dec 5, 2012

Of course, but the precondition is an ordoliberal shift of Europe, to get all the sanctions and governance structures into place so that past abuses won't continue.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Procyon Mukherjee Dec 5, 2012

There is absolutely no reason for U.K. to leave the EU, when the benefits outweigh the costs, if one computes the strategic advantages of trade alone and ‘what if’ that had to be done through painful negotiations and adjustments; there is more to be derived from the common market if there could be more alliances that foster trade rather than limiting it. Broader vision in terms of benefits for one common market is still stinted in the advocacy for lower transaction costs and is yet to move to other areas that could improve efficiency and productivity.

The case in point however moves to the broader alignment that is consistently missing as Britain instead of leading continues to shift the problem back to the center, as if fiscal responsibility of the compact could be transferred to a central planning body which does not have any authority on fiscal matters.

The Maastricht Treaty itself is rather loosely arranged on matters related to exit, but definitely if costs outweigh benefits, there should be a case in favor of such an eventual denouement.

Procyon Mukherjee
- Celt Darnell Aug 14, 2014
  
  Except only 15-18% of Britons feel any cultural or political affinity with Europe.
  
  "the European project of integration is not some form of mathematical equation which measures only 'costs'."
  
  It is for us -- and it's too expensive. We're leaving.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- dalai guevara Dec 7, 2012
  
  'If costs outweigh benefits'
  
  the European project of integration is not some form of mathematical equation which measures only 'costs'. For some young democracies, this format allowed the permanent and sustainable relief from the likes of Franco, Jaruzelski, and soon the Westminster Bubble (for the Scots in 2014).
  
  You cannot put a value on that - it's that plain and simple.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
John Brian Shannon Dec 4, 2012

Hi Tony,

While agreeing almost completely with your thoughts expressed here, I wonder if you will address the following points in a later post.

1) This idea of mutualized debt is a great idea to solve the economic problems of the Eurozone, but what's in it for Germany?

To empty the pockets of Germany (and it would take all of that and perhaps more) to prop up those nations which were failing economically both BEFORE joining the Eurozone AND afterwards, seems unfair.

What must it seem like to German taxpayers?

So far, Germany has paid more and received less than any of the other Eurozone partners -- not only that, some southern European hooligans burned German flags in the streets -- after German citizens had bailed out their economies, not once, but twice.

I suggest if that scenario continues to play out, it would be in Germany's best interest to run, not walk away from that so-called deal.

2) If there is to be a truly prosperous Europe, then we should keep in mind the quote, 'a manifold cord is not easily broken'.

Debt mutualization should be a pan-European solution, one where all contribute to the levelization of all of Europe's economies -- as opposed to the destruction of the Germany economy in order to support the failed economic choices of other Eurozone member states.

Pan-European debt mutualization would help to put an end to the last vestiges of feudalism in Europe and usher in an era of European common purpose and direction.

Europe has a choice to become a strong, unified and cosmopolitan nation with a strong sense of common purpose, or to continue, half united and half divided.

As of today, the combined nations of Europe represent something quite wonderful and unique in the world. The sum total is truly greater than the disparate parts. Look at all the Europeans have accomplished since the beginning of the industrial revolution. No other country or region can wear those shoes.

But as great as it is today, if Europe continues to fire on only 4 out of its possible 8 cylinders, then it has hit the top of the bell curve and is enjoying a short plateau (which might last 25 years) before the long and inexorable descent, vis-à-vis the world's other nations.

Unless soon united in common cause and direction, unless interdependent and complementary within its boundaries, Europe has seen its best days and never did fulfill its full potential.

And not only would that be a shame in itself, it would be seen by future historians as a Europe shirking from the true greatness it was, and is, destined for.

3) A rising tide floats all boats. It is impossible to try to raise only your own part of the lake, to float just your own boat. That should be evident.

So then, why are the nations of Europe trying to do just that?

Common monetary and fiscal policy and a European Fed would do much to stabilize and strengthen Europe, bring common purpose and clarity, and drive Europeans together, instead of driving them apart.

Not that Europe should become the United States, but that it should choose self-strengthening and interdependent economic policy and regulation over the present, often internecine economics.

Europe soon faces a profound choice, a Hydra at the plateau -- or an Orpheus at the beginning of his great calling.

Best regards, JBS
http://jbsnews.com
A new reply to this comment has been posted.

https://prosyn.org/h9I2Njo

Britain’s European Destiny

To continue reading, subscribe now.

Support High-Quality Commentary

New Comment

Email this piece to a friend

Contact us

Log in/Register

Britain’s European Destiny

To continue reading, subscribe now.

Support High-Quality Commentary

Edit Newsletter Preferences

Set up Notification