David Cameron attempted to inject some passion into his mission for the UK to remain a member of the EU by making a “big, bold patriotic case” for membership.
His speech is being read as a warning that Brexit poses a security risk to the rest of Europe – which assumes that there is an ever-present risk of it descending into war and genocide.
It would be arrogant to suggest that the UK alone prevents Europe-wide chaos but the real risk, it seems, is that the exit of the UK could lead to the exit of other member states. The risk being alluded to is of an unstable Europe which is not bound together by the same ties that bind the EU.
Cameron played down the risk of other states, particularly in central and eastern Europe, wanting to leave. But given some of the populist and extreme politics emerging in some of the member states, it is a risk that should not be dismissed.
There has long been debate about the role the EU plays in maintaining peace on the continent. It was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2012 and the pooling of resources and sovereignty in some areas means that the EU has done what other international organisations or alliances, such as NATO, cannot.
The UK’s decision to join the EU in 1973 was nevertheless seen as being based more on economic pragmatism than a desire to forge a common European destiny. But the extent to which the legal and economic systems have now been intertwined in the long history of the EU mean that Cameron has missed a trick in linking the single market to the achievement of peace. The whole purpose of economic interdependency was to make war not just improbable, but unthinkable between European states.
Cameron did not say that Brexit would lead to war. He spoke of “maintaining common purpose” within Europe and questioned whether we can be so sure that “peace and stability on our continent are assured beyond any shadow of doubt”. This again is a pragmatic argument designed to point the electorate in the direction of what we know works, rather than what it does not know. The risk is instability in its many forms – not only military conflict.
Cameron also used the opportunity to confront claims that the EU is preventing the UK from having a foreign policy of its own. EU membership has not stopped British cooperation with other states in the Commonwealth or beyond or activities within NATO.
Newsnight EU referendum Special: Security and Brexit
The following video clip is not part of the original article
Video © BBC Global
Video © BBC Global
A cautious approach
EU foreign policy is a curious animal. It is an area (along with social welfare, education and aspects of healthcare) in which member states have been reluctant to pursue integration to the same extent as others. Foreign policy is rather different to the law of the single market, for example, which is both detailed, wide-ranging and generally subject to majority voting in the EU Council.
Member states must vote unanimously on foreign policy decisions and the European Court of Justice does not have the power to overrule national foreign policy. This has led to European foreign policy being characterised as “intergovernmental”, since the national governments remain largely in charge.
The foreign policy provisions were amended in the Lisbon Treaty. Upon signing, David Miliband, then foreign minister (and the man chosen to introduce Cameron’s speech), said the treaty ring-fenced foreign policy away from other areas of European integration. He argued that the sovereignty of the member states was being protected.
While the EU has the institutional machinery in place to be a more effective international actor, it is clear from the treaty that this cannot happen unless all the member states make definite (and unanimous) choices about the direction they want it to take.
Of course the UK would by no means be able to influence the remaining EU member states or institutions from the outside. While we often think about foreign policy in terms of military action, sanctions, or even trade, Cameron used the interesting example of combatting Ebola as an issue that requires a joint response. This is very much a practical, response-driven scenario which deserves to be considered alongside more traditional aspects of foreign policy.
He is also correct to point to the very complex legal arrangements which underpin the relationship between the EU and non-EU states. In the case of Brexit, if the UK does want to be involved in confronting common challenges alongside the rest of the planet, then the bureaucracy involved in putting in place agreements would be far more onerous than is the case at present and would prevent getting to the heart of the matters which affect us all.
All told, Cameron’s pitch for the UK was not quite a “big, bold” vision for either the UK or the EU in the future. Rather, his view of the UK as being better off sitting at the European table while the decisions are made is firmly calculated to speak to the “obstinately practical” British public, who are wary of grand schemes.
Despite the headlines, his warning about peace in Europe is less about the prospect of war in Europe or scaremongering and more about the external factors causing instability in Europe and across the globe. In reading the public in this way, he is counting on the electorate preferring what they know to what they do not know.
Paul James Cardwell, Reader in EU External Relations Law, University of Sheffield
This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.
- Can we believe what the Treasury says about the cost of Brexit? (The Conversation and Newsnight video)
- Why pulling out of the EU won’t give Britain complete control over its affairs
- Eurosceptics & UKIP grateful for baby talk distraction as Tory review into EU powers comes up with ‘wrong’ answer
- At last, John Oliver dissects Trump’s dangerous kind of craziness (video)
- John Oliver does piggate (video)
- Bernie Sanders and Jeremy Corbyn: Parallel lines (full length video)
- Jon Stewart to Fox News: Your hypocrisy isn’t a bug in the Fox model, it’s the feature! (video)
- Donald Trump attacks GOP presidential candidates for suckling at the Koch brothers’ money teat (video)
- Louise Mensch – the gaffe prone gift to social media that keeps on giving
- What does sex education in American schools look like? (Jon Oliver) (video)
- Christian conservative parents and the virulent question of sex education in school (video)
- Jon Stewart’s full extended interview with President Barack Obama (video)
- Ricky Gervais’ prediction of the Samuel L Jackson racism incident was spookily accurate
- “This is a terrorist attack” Jon Stewart’s powerful monologue on the Charleston race murders (video)
- The Daily Show with Jon Stewart unpacks the UK general election Part 2 (video)
- James O’Brien’s only making plans for Nigel (or when is toast not toast?) (video)
- Jon Stewart: Hillary Clinton’s donations and diarrhoea (video)
- The ugliness of Fox News and Megyn Kelly’s tsunami of bone headed ignorance (video)
- DOJ investigation proves racism is rampant in Ferguson police department (video)
- Fox News: Ferguson riots result of “racial arsonists” stoking a victim mentality in black America (video)
- How groupthink is transforming (and destroying) our democracy (video)
- Fox News hates the US constitution
- Housing the homeless – yes the answer really is this simple
- How Citigroup wrote the US budget and effectively repealed the Dodd-Frank bank reforms (video)
- Corporations are legally defined as people except when they commit a crime
- Regulation is why the Canadian banking system has had no financial crises in 150 years
- Irrational Debate And A Misinformed Public: Wealth Inequality
- What has Goldman Sachs got in common with the new version of the Monopoly board game?
- Right-wing ideology: “government should never interfere with the free market (except when it suits conservatives)”
- Where Are The British Daily Show And Colbert Report?
- J K Rowling knows that fair tax is the price we pay for civilisation
- RNC claim thirty-five thousand ‘possible’ cases of voter fraud justifies their racist reforms but they’re wrong (again)
- Biased US supreme court strengthens wealthy donors’ influence on political parties
- Supreme Court declares racism is dead in America…..but they forgot to tell Donald Sterling and Cliven Bundy…
- Thomas Piketty – Why we need a global wealth tax
- Benghazi! Benghazi! Benghazi! Stephen Colbert and Jon Stewart on the 60 minutes gaff
- If you don’t like gays, don’t run a bed and breakfast
- The end of net neutrality is why everything that you enjoy on the internet is about to cost you more
- NRA Conference Speakers Message To America: Fear Everything And Everyone
- The 24 hour news cycle gives us all heat but very little light
- Capitalism: serving God and Mammon?
- If you thought that 1,700 applications for 8 coffee shop jobs was bad you ain’t seen nothing yet!(imincorrigible.wordpress.com)
- How banks have hoodwinked you over high frequency trading
- Gun Control Works and the Australian Experience Proves It
- Investment Banks & Bankers: Too Big (Headed) To Jail
- “Murdoch’s World” and praising fox like you should! (imincorrigible.wordpress.com)
- Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch’s War on Journalism