On 23rd June several million people are expected to vote
in a referendum on whether the UK should remain a member of the EU or leave. It
is presented by both sides of the divide as being a straight choice whose result
will have far-reaching consequences. Yet this is an extraordinary exercise in
deceit in a political system which is built on the premise of the great illusion
which sustains Western-style democracy: that the representative democratic
electoral system is capable of delivering meaningful choice. It does
not.
To begin with, it should be acknowledged that a vote to
remain or leave on Thursday 23 June will have no effect in law: the best it can
possibly do is to reinforce one point of view or another. To think
otherwise fails to understand the process by which government policy-making and
law-making is effected. Moreover, t he referendum is
purely advisory in its effect: it can have no direct bearing in law and it will
not of itself alter the position of the UK's relationship within the EU in any
way. It would, of course, be wrong to think that a
government can simply ignore the Public Will when it has gone to such lengths to
seek its view - but it is equally mistaken to imagine that a vote to leave will
lead to an exit from the EU. Indeed, the power to invoke Article 50 to bring the
UK out of the EU resides with Parliament and will require the full process of
law-making to effect - including a raft of legislation and the repeal of the
1972 EC Act.
Apart from the legal and political obstacles to a UK
exit, there is the matter of a committee of civil servants which have, for
several months been considering the consequences of a "Leave" vote and what
steps would need to be taken by a UK administration in such a circumstance.
Amongst these, I understand, are the following options: 1) ignoring the
referendum result entirely (very unlikely); 2) renegotiating the UK position in
the EU and submitting to a new referendum on the basis of fresh circumstances
(possible); 3) renegotiating the UK's position with the EU on a series of
bilateral arrangements which will have the effect of ensuring the UK remains
effectively consonant with, if not an actual Member of, the EU (possible, but
complex, prolonged and unclear); 4) a complete exit
from the EU (a theoretical possibility and an option honoured more by its
inclusion in discussions than by its probability of adoption. In fact, it is
almost inevitable that the main locus for a future government of any persuasion
will be to seek renegotiation of the UK's Membership with a view to bringing
forth a fresh referendum to approve a revised UK Membership
mandate.
- Advertisement -
If this all seems an exercise in futility, there are good reasons why a
popular or even a political consensus will have difficulty resisting the EU
project and these are derived of a powerful current in European history which
favours unification and must be viewed in the context of a two millennia struggle for its achievement. Cultural, economic and demographic
pressures have driven Europes military struggles since the Roman Empire first
made Europe a unified political and fiscal market: since then all European
history has been characterised by attempts to recreate this standard: successive
Emperors and tyrants have sought to create a unified political and economic
system which could
1) extend Europe's landmass and
2) act as a bulwark
against Russia and Asia to the East and Africa to the South.
The shadow of the
Holy Roman Empire still hangs over Europe; it did for Charlemagne, Napoleon and
Hitler who were all motivated as part of this compulsion for a Greater Europe.
That is the prize which hangs before Europe today: it is a Europe that is
protectionist in outlook, and which seeks to dominate those outside its borders
for its own capitalist economic advantage: it has clear political and economic
aspirations. Furthermore, if war is a natural consequence of economic ambition
then conflict assuredly awaits a Greater Europe: we see the warning signs in the
plans to create a European military force, as well as the increasing political
centralisation and the growth of coordinated European foreign policy. It is in
this context that the UK referendum is caught up in the current drive for
European hegemony.
The future of the European project is unknown but
whatever the UK verdict on 23rd June, we should not
expect that it will result in any significant changes of the sort being
promised, threatened or predicted by either side. It will not - nor will it end
the age old aspirations for a Greater
Europe.
Comments
Click Here to View Comments or Join the Conversation