Britain's
Could-Be Role in Europe
By JONATHAN POWER
LONDON-- The British election made one thing very clear
and the other decidedly unclear. The former can be summed up
simply, the second takes more space. If defunct prime
minister John Major had any real commitment to Europe he
totally betrayed it by the timing of his resignation as
leader of the Conservative party. Although privately touting
as his successor Chris Patten, the governor of Hong Kong and
most pro-Europe of senior Conservatives, by resigning
immediately he has made it impossible for Patten to throw
his hat in the ring. Patten can't make a move in British
electoral politics until the hand-over of Hong Kong to China
at midnight on June 30th.
With Patten sidelined Prime Minister Tony Blair has to
decide, if necess a leader who will drive them off to
Euroscepticism, with plenty of back-seat advice from the
still redoubtable Margaret Thatcher.
Nevertheless, as the election revealed--for all the
jingoism poured down their ears by Conservative politicians
and the right wing, mainly foreign-owned, press--the British
are not as reflexively anti-European as has been widely
supposed.
Moreover, given his thumping majority--and on this
question he has the newly revitalized third party force, the
Liberal Democrats to count on--it truly is down to Blair to
decide whether it is good for Britain to take the giant
steps towards a federally-minded Europe that the times
demand. Yet his early moves, although less hostile towards
Europe than his predecessor, still seem to err too much on
the side of caution. Blair seems to have inhaled too deeply
the obfuscatory smoke the Labour party thought it had to
blow in the eyes of the electorate in order to ensure
victory.
If Blair is not both to marginalise Britain and to miss
the historic opportunity to banish strife and war from
Europe for all time he needs to grasp three nettles rather
quickly, one economic, one military and one historical.
The economic one, monetary union, is arguably the easiest
to reach for--for if Britain doesn't take the plunge and
join up the consequences for Britain will, in all
likelihood, be an immediate and massive drain of foreign
investment from Britain to the continent. As Michael
Camdessus, managing director of the International Monetary
Fund, has acutely observed, the Europe of a single currency
is going to be a very attractive proposition: "With one very
strong currency to anchor macro-economic policy Europe would
enjoy an increasingly dynamic internal market, more trade
with the rest of the world, higher savings and investment
and lower interest rates." Of course there are (mainly
British) economists who argue that the tight fiscal policies
likely to be demanded by membership will put a clamp on new
found British growth. But as the Irish and Danish experience
makes clear fiscal tightening can actually stimulate growth,
provided it includes a commitment to substantial deficit
reduction. The good news is that the new government's
surprise decision to give the Bank of England independence
on interest rate policy is perhaps an omen of a European
single currency approach to come.
Next is the military nettle patch, sewn more by President
Bill Clinton and his NATO expansion policy than by John
Major, though he was a more than willing collaborator. The
best course for a Europe that wants to knit Russia more
tightly into western civilization where the soul of its
literature, music, philosophy, if perhaps not always its
politics, has always been, is not to separate it off by
drawing the line of new NATO membership right up to its
borders. It is rather either to leave well alone, NATO as it
is (which the U.S. Senate could well insist on) or to
incorporate Russia into an expanded NATO, where besides
pulling it into Europe it would be a useful bulwark against
growing Chinese military strength. At the same time there
should be a move to intermesh the West European (Defense)
Union into the European Union. Thus when the former east
European members of the Warsaw Pact are ready to join the
European union they automatically become part of European
military structures.
This is both a more logical and less belligerent way of
filling the vacuum in western Europe caused by the ending of
the Cold War than by a provocative NATO expansion.
The historical nettle is the most telling. Blair either
has an historical sense or he doesn't. Chancellor Helmut
Kohl of Germany has it in spades. As he observes, if
Germany, which will always be Europe's single most powerful
country, is not to be a dangerous loose barge on the
European river it needs to be firmly tied ever deeper into
Europe. But it can only be properly tied if there are enough
other big boats for it to be anchored to. France is one for
sure, but Britain has to be the other. This is a sine qua
non for peace in 21st. century Europe. If Blair comprehends
this then everything else, economic, military and political
should fall into place in his mind. The question is without
Chris Patten to educate and prod him from the opposition
does he on his own have the wisdom and vision to go
forward?
May 7, 1997,
LONDON
Copyright © 1997 By JONATHAN POWER
Note: I can be reached by phone +44 385 351172
and e-mail: JonatPower@aol.com
|