Why would the leaders of younger European states be so desperate to secure their EU membership, whereas Old World politicians are faced with greater anti-EU pressure? Radio VR is discussing the issue with Ian Dunt, editor of politics.co.uk, the media outlet of the House of Commons, and Elena Ananyeva, Head of Center for British Studies at RAS Institute for European Studies.
According to The Guardian report, “David Cameron has indicated that he would be prepared to recommend to the British people that they should vote to leave the EU if he fails to secure major changes to Britain’s membership terms after a Tory victory in next year’s general election”.
Says Ian Dunt, editor of politics.co.uk:
David Cameron is under pressure from the right-wing elements in his own Conservative Party, who have long had very serious problems with the EU. They’ve had this for decades, absolutely decades, they’ve been going on about this one subject.
But it seems, actually, that they’ve become more extreme as the years have gone on. Whereas before, in the past there used to be some pro-EU individuals inside the Conservative Party, now there are none. There are just people who want to get out completely or others who want to reform it very thoroughly.
And David Cameron, he is a very weak Prime Minister. He is sort of held hostage by the more right-wing forces within his own party. And he is under attack from left and right in quite a substantial way. So, his way of dealing with the situation has been to suggest holding a referendum on the EU membership, before which he will try and get significant reforms. And how substantial those reforms will be or whether he could even win a vote on the EU, are two very big questions.
So, what is it that makes people unhappy with the EU membership?
Ian Dunt: The Conservatives will very often give you a long list of causes. They object to human rights legislation, they object to some of the regulatory burdens that come from the EU.
But the truth is, I think, if you go back really into British discomfort with the EU, it stems from much more significant, much more fundamental ideas. You know, Britain is an island and it has developed as something which feels as if it is part of Europe, but also separate to Europe. And that feeling of being half in half out permeates all aspects of Britain’s relationships with Europe, either on a political, but also on a social and on a cultural scale.
Social – are we talking about immigration flows?
Ian Dunt: Yes, I mean, immigration is a massive issue for the British voters. Even two or three years ago the British voters did not really think of Europe as the main immigration issue. What the UKIP – a quite sort of solidly right-wing anti-European party – has been very successful in doing, is in entwining those two issues – immigration and Europe – so that they’ve almost become the same idea now.
And that has been politically a very successful operation for them, however it has led to some rather unfortunate rhetoric and toughening up of attitudes towards especially European immigration.
So, what is your forecast?
Ian Dunt: First of all, the Conservatives need to win the general election for them to have the referendum. Labour – the opposition – are not proposing a referendum and they are very unlikely to do so. As things stand Labour is very weak, but they still seem as if they are going to win the general election, only just it will prove to be very tight. But the polling does suggest that they are going to win. So, probably, the referendum will not happen at all.
If it does happen, actually, I think it is very unlikely that Britain would vote to leave Europe. If you look at the polling now, most people in Britain would vote to stay in the EU. They are uncomfortable with the EU, they have lots of problems with it, they have lots of objections, they have lots of things they want to see changed, but they would vote to stay.
And typically speaking, when you have a referendum on an issue like this, the status quo side, the side that warns of the risks of change tends to become more powerful the closer you get to voting day. So, the fact that already it looks like Brits would stay, means that it would be a very difficult referendum for Euroskeptics to win.
And, finally, the EU enlargement – is it still a welcome process?
Ian Dunt: Most Euroskeptics will complain about EU enlargement, but the truth is that they will complain about anything that has the word “EU” in it. So, I wouldn’t take too much from their views on that subject.
But the real reality is – in British politics very little attention is paid to what actually happens in the EU. A lot of attention is paid to the EU as a concept; do we want to be part of it? But in terms of what really goes on there, very little attention. And I would suggest that most members of the British public are barely even aware that an enlargement is taking place”…
At the same time leaders of another country situated on the opposite side of Europe, are making huge efforts to win an EU membership. In his September, 28 interview to the 1+1 Ukrainian TV Channel, Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko announced that the EU-Ukraine Association agreement will take effect in its entirety on November 1, 2014. He described it as a great victory of Ukrainian diplomacy. “No postponements, none of that is going to happen, Poroshenko stated. — In the course of negotiations we received a right to protect our market". However, the upbeat statement appeared to be premature.
On September, 29 the Council of the EU ruled to postpone the implementation of a free trade zone between the EU and Ukraine for 15 months till December, 31, 2015.
Says Elena Ananyeva, Head of Center for British Studies at RAS Institute for European Studies:
“First of all, Ukraine is not invited to be a member of the EU, only the free trade association is offered, which for the Ukrainians is not enough. Secondly, the UK itself was the proponent of the EU enlargement, because they wanted, so to say, to dilute the EU. And now they are the victims of their own policy.
You said that the EU authorities are not actually inviting Ukraine to join the EU. However, the statements coming from Kiev sound a little different.
Of course, there are differences in the perceptions of the EU and of Kiev. Poroshenko, of course, wants to speed up the process and he wants the Ukrainians to be sure that Ukraine will eventually join the EU in the five years time. But this will not come true, because Ukraine should adapt to the EU standards and this will not be an easy process.
Secondly, the EU is certainly not ready to open its borders to the Ukrainians. So, this is the problem. And the third problem is that they are not ready to give money to Ukraine to level its standard of living and its economy to the level of the EU. So, this is a wishful thinking on the part of Kiev.
And what is the whole story about the association agreement?
Elena Ananyeva: There is an agreement between the EU, Russia and Ukraine. There were the negotiations held and there was an agreement that the implementation of this agreement in its economic part will start only on the 1st of January of 2016.
Maybe, Poroshenko is just trying to have a good face with the game going wrong, because some parts of the agreement may be implemented on the 1st of November, but not all of them, otherwise Russia will close its borders to the goods flowing from Ukraine for the sake of its own market.
It looks like the ordinary Ukrainian people are actually being invited into a trap.
Yes! A year ago, before Yanukovych were to sign this agreement in November, the propaganda was implicitly conveying to the Ukrainians that this is not just an agreement on the free trade, but the agreement on the full membership in the EU, on open borders for the Ukrainians to come to the EU with no visas and the European standards, not technical standards, but the standards of living – higher salaries, higher pensions, higher benefits. So, to my mind this was a trap and this was a lie.
What kind of policy would the EU prefer regarding Ukraine and what are the processes going on inside the EU?
Elena Ananyeva: The EU, pursuing its policy of enlargement, wants to widen its market. This is quite understandable. But there are the interests of other players. So, the EU should keep that in mind. And Russia was persistent in trying to persuade the EU and Ukraine to have the trilateral talks, before President Yanukovych were to sign this agreement on the free trade zone between Ukraine and the EU a year ago.
Yanukovych understood that this agreement was not very beneficial to Ukraine and he wanted to postpone the signing of this agreement, and that’s why the Maidan started, and the EU said – we will sign this agreement with another president – which it did.
So, this process of enlargement is trying to enlarge the market for the EU. But in this process of integration the powers in Brussels, the supranational institutions are trying to get an upper hand over the national governments.
The UK has always had a very difficult relationship with the EU in the sense of this supranationality. And that is why the UK was always trying to have a separate voice in the EU. And now, with these processes of immigration, with the laws that the EU wants all the member countries to implement, the UK is going to renegotiate its membership in the EU.
The thing is that the UK wanted the supranational powers of Brussels to be diluted by inviting new members. They wanted France and Germany not to have the full power in the EU. That’s why they invited new members, because they wanted the pace of integration to get slower.
But it turned out that the countries of the Eurozone want fast integration and deeper integration. The UK doesn’t want it. But it leaves itself outside of the EU core, the core of the Eurozone and the Eurozone countries say that the UK has no right to demand any access to the decision-making processes in the Eurozone. So, this is the paradox and these are the antagonistic features of the EU”.
