I don't understand the narrow isolationist view espoused by many in Britain towards the creation of the two new "top jobs" in the EU.

The new European High Representative will not replace individual EU countries foreign affairs, nor prevent them using their embassies from operating their own private foreign affairs.

Where the High Representative will take the lead, is in presenting Europe's position in matters grander than individual countries, such as dealing with the threat of Iranian nuclear development or as Middle East peace talks.

It would be surely preferably to European citizens if Europe acted in a concerted effort to secure a better deal for the continent as a whole and curbed abuse of power in Russia or China by presenting a united front. As well as securing better trade deals from meetings with China or the US. When London speaks alone to Beijing it doesn't carry as much weight as when all 500m Europeans are spoken for.

This is especially important when dealing with Russia. The new ascension countries are worried by the increasingly militarization of Russia and interference in former Soviet Republics. Whilst others are seen to cow to Russia over energy supplies, notably Germany & Italy.

It is in nobody's interest for "please don't turn off our gas" position preventing Europeans condemning Russia's military intervention in neighbouring countries, its hampering of democracy and free speech inside its own borders.

Let me know your thoughts on this

Comments

Add New Search RSS

Ade Hill   |81.105.136.xxx |2009-11-20 19:32:25 I think a lot of people in Britain feel that this is very undemocratic; there is someone who is not British, and not part of the British political establishment, and who has not been subjected to securing any approval whatsoever from the British electorate, who is now the EU President. The same sentiment applies to the Foreign Representative - despite her being a British politician, this extra-national role has not been in any way approved of by the great British public. The example of dealing with Russia is particularly relevant; different countries had very different views regarding the Georgian incident; how can these people claim to speak for all of Europe on such matters, when Europeans have very different views. A European view can't be represented to anyone, because there is no consensus view on anything - and foreign policies shouldn't be agreed on a supra-national level by horse-trading; and I can't see it being done in any other way. In your final paragraph Brian, you mention the hampering of democracy; the creation of these two new posts has ridden roughshod over our democracy. Reply | Quote 0   0

Write comment
Name:
Email:	do not notifynotify
Website:
Title:
UBBCode:	-color-aquablackbluefuchsiagraygreenlimemaroonnavyolivepurpleredsilvertealwhiteyellow -size-tinysmallmediumlargehuge
	Please input the anti-spam code that you can read in the image.

Powered by !JoomlaComment 3.26

3.26 Copyright (C) 2008 Compojoom.com / Copyright (C) 2007 Alain Georgette / Copyright (C) 2006 Frantisek Hliva. All rights reserved."