AllInfo

Guest commentary: Europe needs to make to be honest

admin

Brexit

Guest commentary: Europe needs to make to be honest

The largest EU-Fans have found their answer to the Brexit: even closer cooperation in Europe. Jan-Werner Müller from Princeton University recommends in his comment a completely different way.

A lot of whistling sounds because in Europe’s darkness: “Every crisis is thought a Chance”, or “the founding fathers of the European Union, that Europe comes through crises” – this is the type of sets with which the European elites seek to comfort.

There is also the vague hope that a combination of British pragmatism and Brussels Tricks might cause the Brexit vote, leads in the end to any divorce. One is reminded also of the fact that the French, the Dutch and the Irish have voted in the past decade against the content of the Lisbon Treaty – and today, however, under this contract life.

Not a productive crisis

But these are illusions. Of course, the Fears that the Brexit soon a “Dexit”, “Nexit”, or Similar are artificially inflated: In none of these countries there are also only a majority for the Union to fold. But just as little hope that this crisis somehow leads to a great leap forward when the unit is justified.

It is simply not true that all Europeans – with the exception of the recalcitrant Brits – and- burn to create an ever closer Union. Especially Danish, Swedish and Dutch governments were happy for a long time that London has attracted further European Integration of the brake. The Euro-scepticism is not rooted in these countries as deep as in the UK, but they would all Balk, to deepen the Integration according to the French-German plans.

The German political scientist Jan-Werner Müller teaches since 2005 at the University of Princeton

Also: There are no such plans at all. Berlin and Paris both speak of the “political Union”, but they mean completely different things. Germany is in fact ready for additional responsibilities abfzugeben. But France is – especially under a devastating weakened President Hollande – not on his food, “more sovereignty”, as the misleading wording. In fact, no EU member state has made ever sovereignty, as the vote for the Brexit. In contrast, no American could leave the Federal seed by means of a Referendum from the composite.

The heads of state must draw the lesson that the citizens of Europe are simply not ready for more Integration and that the EU needs to be slower. The opposite Position has its proponents: The wily federalist Guy Verhofstadt, the former Belgian Prime Minister, called immediately after Brexit, according to a new constitutional Convention in order to bring speeds up to a still closer Union is on the way – seems to be a clear case of bigotry, as the American philosopher George Santayana defined: “Double your efforts when you have forgotten your aim”.

What the EU really need now?

To your goals of transparency about remembering and more, what goals are realistic and desirable – this is what the EU needs right now. Due to the many small, UN-coordinated steps the Union has a common currency and external border landed. But both have been consistently denied the financial and practical means, so that today, neither the Eurozone nor the Schengen area are not functioning properly.

And, as if that were not enough, have enjoyed many national governments virtually to engage in a cynical game by preventing that the European Commission could leave the Euro and a Europe in which borders work. If things were actually wrong, they gave, of course, “Brussels”, the blame for this.

The editorial recommends

“We are to divorce,” said EU Council President Tusk at the opening of the EU summit. Only the British grace. Bernd Riegert from Brussels. (28.06.2016)

Before the European Council in Brussels, German Chancellor Angela Merkel reads the British and the Levites: cherry-picking, it should be at the exit from the EU. The SPD calls for an investment offensive in Europe. (28.06.2016)

So much is on the fifth day after the Brexit Referendum: The departure of the British from Europe will still provide for dispute. Both within the EU as well as in the German government coalition, says Christoph Strack. (28.06.2016)

Many of the British, who were in favour of Brexit, would have expected that a withdrawal from the Union will not disrupt relations with Washington. You could be in for a rude awakening. (25.06.2016)

The debate should not be conducted at this point in the abstract about “more” or “less” Europe. The Europeans need to take stock of what you have created. And be open to debating whether you are willing to do the Necessary to fix the poorly-thought-out currency Union and the common border system.

It’s not always forward

In this sense, Verhofstadt is right: It takes an intensive look at the basics. The Brexit has broken a taboo that Europe can only move in the direction of further Integration. There is nothing Unlawful in itself, if member States decide that parts of the Integration for you have gone too far.

Problematic those decisions based on two things: the false premises and false promises are not alone. The pathetic Brexit debate in the run-up to the referendum shows what can happen when the political class capitulated in front of a press, the topics of existential importance of systematically misleading.

Watch the Video
01:56

Share

Uncertainties after Brexit vote

Facebook

Twitter

google+

Whatsapp

Tumblr

VZ

Mr. Wong

Xing

del.icio.us

Webnews

Yigg

Newsvine

Digg

Permalink : http://dw.com/p/1JEq8

Uncertainties after Brexit vote

It is also the most doom shows full episodes, if you allowed a-wing populists such as Nigel Farage, to make the debate. Farage has managed to explain to the Brexit a question of identity: either an authentic English democracy, or a dictatorship of foreigners in Brussels. The “Stay”campaign admitted fatal way, that it’s a representation of something True is in it. From this Moment, all Appeals to their own economic interests (“you will have 4000 pounds per year of less”), only ineffective.

No defence in the debate

No one argued that European Integration threatens the national sovereignty in and of itself, but you can boost on the world stage, even decisive. And also other positions of the Brexit advocates, who accept only their own positions as the only true, remained unchallenged.

Therefore, European politicians should not dread the future in front of it back to put substantial issues on the table. To hold back or to deepen the Integration further and further, without including the citizens, will only confirm to the clichéd view that “the elites listen anyway”. But if you focus on the basics of the European unit, then politicians have to represent them with Courage and Conviction, both of which people like Cameron and Corbyn could completely miss. Populism and national identity not win automatically in combat and the idea of European unity. It is only the question of how the supporters of Europe to represent their positions.

Jan-Werner Müller is a Professor of politics at Princeton University and a member of the Institute of human Sciences in Vienna. His book “What is populism?” to be published in September.

You can leave below this article, leave a comment. We look forward to your expression!

Exit mobile version