Article

2004-06-22 Europe

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Brett_the_Quarkian 2004-06-22 12:41:00 AM|| || Front Page|| [1 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 I don't think Tony's getting this one at all. May have bitten off more than he can chew.

Posted by Howard UK 2004-06-22 4:20:33 AM|| 2004-06-22 4:20:33 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 The reality for Britain in Europe is simple: united we'll fall, divided we might stand a sporting chance.

Posted by B 2004-06-22 4:29:10 AM|| 2004-06-22 4:29:10 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 How can Steyn oppose the single most important project in the world?!

Posted by Robert Crawford 2004-06-22 7:16:15 AM|| [http://www.kloognome.com/] 2004-06-22 7:16:15 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 Crawford> How can Steyn oppose the single most important project in the world?!

The same way some countries opted out of World War II when *it* was the most important project in the world, and the same way some countries opted out of taking sides in the Cold War when *it* was the most important thing happening in the world. Or the same way Portugal refused to finance Colombus' foolish expedition westwards.

But the problem is that he is indeed opposing it as you say, rather than simply opting out of it. My annoyance at Steyn is not that he rejects the constitution, it's that I've not see him anywhere in that article call for UK to leave the EU in its entirety.

And yeah, all those paragraphs and fine-print he mentions, I hope he remembers about half of these were due to Britain's insistence on caveats upon caveat. A constitution without UK involved would somewhat more simple and streamlined I think, since UK alone represent more than half of the exceptions that needed to be mentioned in said constitution.

"Say what you like about those shifty duplicitous Continentals, but on this issue it's successive British governments that have been shifty and Monsieur du Plicitous who's been admirably straightforward."

No shit.

Posted by Aris Katsaris 2004-06-22 9:21:36 AM|| 2004-06-22 9:21:36 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 what an idiot

Posted by aris hater 2004-06-22 10:37:34 AM|| 2004-06-22 10:37:34 AM|| Front Page Top

#6 Right, Aris. It's all Britains fault that D'Estang and his hench-persons put together the most impenetrable mass of feel-good bullshit and lawyerese anyone's ever seen and presented it as a proposed constitution.

You bet.

Posted by mojo 2004-06-22 10:42:29 AM|| 2004-06-22 10:42:29 AM|| Front Page Top

#7 I was being sarcastic, Aris. The EU's no where near the most important project in the world.

Posted by Robert Crawford 2004-06-22 10:47:27 AM|| [http://www.kloognome.com] 2004-06-22 10:47:27 AM|| Front Page Top

#8 I was being sarcastic, Aris.

I would have *never* guessed.

mojo> I don't care how much you reject reality --reality's still there. AFAIK, it was British objections that forced the inclusion of trully opaque "lawyerese" such as:

"If members of the Council, representing:
(a) at least three-quarters of the level of population, or
(b) at least three-quarters of the number of Member States necessary to constitute a blocking minority resulting from the application of Article I-24, first subparagraph, indicate their opposition to the Council adopting an act by a qualified majority, the Council shall discuss the issue."

This kind of bullshit wasn't in D'estang's work. This was part of the recent bullshit compromises more than half of which were meant to pacify UK. As far as I know only UK wanted the creation of a whole paragraphs concerning the qualified minorities on the "discussion" of issues.

Posted by Aris Katsaris 2004-06-22 11:16:38 AM|| 2004-06-22 11:16:38 AM|| Front Page Top

#9 And Robert, concerning EU not being the most important project in the world, as far as I know EU is the most talked-about non-WOT related subject in this forum, love it or hate it -- and given that this is a WOT-centered forum populated mostly by Americans, that's saying something I think.

EU's also the only matter that half a continent had recently referendums over, and quite likely half a continent will soon again have referendums over.

Posted by Aris Katsaris 2004-06-22 11:31:49 AM|| 2004-06-22 11:31:49 AM|| Front Page Top

#10 I read the constitution when it was in draft form, before the caveat stuff was put in, and as I recall it tried to encode a lot of feel-good socialist policy stuff, as opposed to simply outlining a mechanism of government.

Posted by virginian 2004-06-22 11:32:27 AM|| 2004-06-22 11:32:27 AM|| Front Page Top

#11 virginian> Indeed. I'm not saying *all* the problems of the consitution, arose out of UK objections. Only half of them. :-)

And some of the "socialist-policy" stuff would be bound to enter regardless:
European constitution don't tend to be as rare to change as the US one, so I believe stuff often get added to them which end up enshrining particular policies. E.g. the constitution of Greece includes provisions on the protection of forest areas, the function of universities and the role of education, the authority that regulates radio-tv frequencies, and lots such stupid stuff which I personally think should be simple laws rather than parts of a constitution.

Posted by Aris Katsaris 2004-06-22 11:42:34 AM|| 2004-06-22 11:42:34 AM|| Front Page Top

#12 Le Chirac, La belette premiÃ¨re a peur de ses propres gens votant sur la constitution. Maintenant cette chose entiÃ¨re pue !

(thirdpage.com)

Posted by Pepe LePeu 2004-06-22 11:44:30 AM|| 2004-06-22 11:44:30 AM|| Front Page Top

#13 I liked the footnote to the EU Constitution that said that all member states will be referred to as Departments of France. I thought that was wonderfully inclusive.

Posted by yank 2004-06-22 1:20:53 PM|| [politicaljunky.blogspot.com] 2004-06-22 1:20:53 PM|| Front Page Top

#14 Serious question.

Has anyone debated what happens to various EU overseas territories, dominions, and Departments? Does French Polynesia still stay under the boot of France or could they become a member state of the EU if they pushed? Same with Frenchy Guyana, or the little UK and Dutch dots in the Carribiean?

Posted by yank 2004-06-22 1:22:26 PM|| [politicaljunky.blogspot.com] 2004-06-22 1:22:26 PM|| Front Page Top

#15 yank> I'm pretty sure that no part of a member state can assume that it can become a member state itself by breaking away from its own nation. If it gains independence from its country, that's obviously independence from the EU as well. Let it apply for membership on its own afterwards and then it's up to the rest of the countries on whether they'll accept it or not.

---

As to the rest of your question, scope of the Constitution is declared thusly in the draft (and I don't believe anything has changed in this articles since the draft):

Article IV-4

Scope

1. The Treaty establishing the Constitution shall apply to the [insert list of member states]

2. The Treaty establishing the Constitution shall apply to the French overseas departments, the Azores, Madeira and the Canary Islands in accordance with Article III-329 of Part III.

3. The special arrangements for association set out in Title IV of Part III of the Treaty
establishing the Constitution shall apply to the overseas countries and territories listed in Annex II to the TEC.

The Treaty establishing the Constitution shall not apply to overseas countries and territories having special relations with the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland which are not included in that list.

4. The Treaty establishing the Constitution shall apply to the European territories for whose external relations a Member State is responsible.

5. The Treaty establishing the Constitution shall apply to the Ãland Islands in accordance with the provisions set out in Protocol 2 to the Act concerning the conditions of accession of the Republic of Austria, the Republic of Finland and the Kingdom of Sweden.

6. Notwithstanding the preceding paragraphs:
(a) the Treaty establishing the Constitution shall not apply to the Faeroe Islands;
(b) the Treaty establishing the Constitution shall not apply to the sovereign base areas of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Cyprus;
(c) the Treaty establishing the Constitution shall apply to the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man only to the extent necessary to ensure the implementation of the arrangements for those islands set out in the Treaty concerning the accession of new Member States to the European Economic Community and to the European Atomic Energy Community, signed on 22 January 1972.

Posted by Aris Katsaris 2004-06-22 2:12:41 PM|| 2004-06-22 2:12:41 PM|| Front Page Top

#16 Well if I was Bavaria, or Tuscany, I'd declare independence and join the EU seperately to avoid the additional layer of taxation.

If I were the independence movement in French Polynesia I'd be thinking the same thing. They could almost certainly get a better deal as part of Europe than as part of a state that is part of Europe. Ditto Scotland, Whales, Basque, and a dozen other areas. But that's just me, perhaps the historical warm-fuzzy of being part of a thousand years of history and culture is stronger than I imagine even if they are willing to see that history seriously dilluted into the federal state.

Posted by yank 2004-06-22 3:13:26 PM|| [politicaljunky.blogspot.com] 2004-06-22 3:13:26 PM|| Front Page Top

#17 I think the historical warm-fuzzy is indeed stronger than you imagine. But I have indeed heard mention of Scottish, Welsh, Basque and such nationalists wanting to separate from their countries and become separate member-states of the EU. But such people ofcourse would have probably wanted independence from their current countries even if EU didn't exist.

You have to again keep in mind however that you need a unanimous agreement of the current member-states before any new new member state is accepted.

Posted by Aris Katsaris 2004-06-22 3:58:22 PM|| 2004-06-22 3:58:22 PM|| Front Page Top

#18 Would they need 100% approval from all member states? Imagine French Polynesia which recently voted in some Independence-minded fellows. If they went around the EU saying they would love to be a member state, but if not they absolutely would not tolerate being a French possession anymore what would happen?

I assume the French would try to veto. Would a United Europe sit idly by and allow the French to send troops and beat the Polynesians back into submission?

Posted by Yank 2004-06-22 10:54:10 PM|| [http://politicaljunky.blogspot.com] 2004-06-22 10:54:10 PM|| Front Page Top

#19 Yank you are wasting your time with this idiot..

Posted by Anon34 2004-06-22 11:12:02 PM|| 2004-06-22 11:12:02 PM|| Front Page Top

#20 The EU looking more and more like an empire. :0

Posted by Rafael 2004-06-22 11:25:52 PM|| 2004-06-22 11:25:52 PM|| Front Page Top

#21 Yank> Why are you confusing two different issues? I already said that accession of a new member state requires absolute unanimity. You seek to confuse this issue with the issue of a territory breaking away from its country. That's between the territory and the country, ofcourse. If the territory breaks away from the country, they no longer have any connection to the EU. Doesn't that make sense?

As for whether EU will try to stop its member state from sending army to territories that are recognized to be legally theirs, it has never done so this far, and I don't see why it would do so in the future. EU never tried to stop the Spanish from keeping the Basques in Spain, and never tried to stop the Brits from keeping North Ireland in the UK.

But if you are referring to oppression, that's ofcourse difference -- France wouldn't have a right to violate the political or human rights of the French Polynesians. Any French polynesian, as citizen of the EU, would have a right to press charges against his government for violating his rights.

Rafael> *g* That map's a few days outdated. Croatia should have been colored as a candidate member state, same as Bulgaria, Romania. and Turkey.

Posted by Aris Katsaris 2004-06-22 11:50:30 PM|| 2004-06-22 11:50:30 PM|| Front Page Top

13:17 Zenster
13:17 Zenster
03:39 Zenster
03:39 Zenster
03:39 Zenster
03:39 Zenster
19:04 Anonymous5329
19:04 Anonymous5329
18:08 Zenster
18:08 Zenster
17:46 Anonymous5329
17:46 Anonymous5329
16:42 Zenster
16:42 Zenster
16:31 Zenster
16:31 Zenster
12:32 Aris Katsaris
11:53 TheAZCowBoy
18:11 Free Will
08:00 Tim Blake
20:26 If not holier - smarter than thou
11:51 Lucky
09:11 Robert Crawford
02:51 rex