As Mark announced on the update to his post, Cameron has formally reasserted his desire for the Conservatives to leave the European People’s Party, the centre right coalition for the European Parliament. Then he will attempt to form a new bloc, which supports the economic benefits of Europe but keeps away from the federalist leanings underpinning that the EPP displays.
The problem as the FT’s Brussels Bureau Chief, makes clear is that the alternative to the EPP doesn’t look that promising and worse, where there is promise for a new bloc, that may cause Mr Cameron as many problems. Yet the Conservative Party’s European alliances are only a small part of the bigger picture. Cameron’s move away from the EPP is not unusual or without precedent in British politics but it is one that has been tried and tested before and has invariably come up short. Furthermore, Cameron risks isolating the UK from Europe precisiely at a time when greater cooperation is, and will be necessary, all to secure control of a rebel wing of his party.
British parties and Europe
British political parties have a long and enduring precedent of meddling with the European Union. This volatile relationship is largely unique in western Europe a product of our policy making and party system. Where other European countries such as Germany formulate policy with regards to Europe more at the technical level of the civil service, British parties have always juggled with Europe according to the needs of the party.
With such a narrow party system, the importance of party unity is paramount to maintain an electoral advantage, Europe has proved incredibly divisive to British parties over the years, from Conservative anxiety over its free trade (both for and against), Federalism ( more against) and immigration, to name but a few of the key issues. Labour have been similarly divided over issues such immigration, the protection of workers and union rights. Both parties have had pangs of regret, Europe seemed a decidedly less exciting alternative to the British Empire which both parties opted to cling onto as it crumbled through Post-war Britain’sfingers.
To resolve the issue, parties have had to avoid Europe as a wedge issue, and find a stance which placataes enough dissenters for it not to be an issue in the election. Three consecutive electoral defeats have left the Conservatives hungry for power, and Cameron wants no splits as the party heads towards a 2010 election but will his move to placate the wing of his party prove short-sighted, Brown you will remember tried a not dissimilar approach for the Lisbon Treaty wherehe opted to sign the agreement but miss the photo opp, pleasing no one and irritating everyone.
Cameron’s Problems
Cameron’s latest attempt to navigate the field are perilous.
Tony Barber outlines the options:
The most likely candidates are the Czech Civic Democrats (who have a helpful English-language website) and Poland’s Law and Justice party (Polish only, as far as I can tell, but here’s what the party slogan translates as: “Patriotism, solidarity, modernity”). Neither fits neatly into mainstream western European definitions of moderate centre-right politics. Both have earned a reputation for being “difficult” on the EU stage. Like the Tories, however, they are not afraid to challenge conventional wisdom. They should be taken seriously.
Other possible companions for the Conservatives are Italy’s Northern League, which is distinctly more right-wing. The League, I fear, could embarrass the Tories with its hostility to foreigners and rather peculiar version of northern Italian ethnic politics. Then there is the Danish People’s Party, which has a similar brand of conservative, anti-immigrant populism. Finally, there are some minor parties in Belgium, Latvia and Lithuania.
The problem for the Tories is that the chaps like them, across Europe, by and large are pro-Europeans leaving them with slightly oddball parties such as Law and Justice, who could cause them alot of potential embarassment if/when the Conservatives return to power. Law and Justice on issues such as homosexuality, not to mention have proven particualrly awkward partners in the European Union, something which may marginalise Conservative’s position. Italy’s Northern League would be even worse, I could build a case against them but this poster from the 2005 regional elections in Italy does it so much better. Even within his party Cameron’s move could backfire,because in bringing back Kenneth Clark one of his biggest hitters in parliament and to the public, he has brought in one of the most pro-European Conservatives. Cameron is probably not a fool, andmust be aware of this but nevertheless it adds one more precarious balancing act that taps into deeply rooted feelings within the Conservative party, issue by issue he’ll have to take the temperatures of the factions to negotiate his pathway through Europe.
Britain and Europe in the 21st Century
I am sympathetic to the Tory position on Federalisation, I disagree but their arguments are legitimate and fair. The European Union has largely failed to communicate what it stands for, what it does and where its going to, to European citizens. It’s not just the European Union’s fault, the British media and British political parties have constantly switched sides on Europe, always avoided the debate for fearing of exposing divisions in their own party.
The European Union however, is much much more than bendy bananas, more even than free markets and open borders. The European Union is about the long term security and future of the European continent, its very much about geopolitics and as Prodi made clear in a recent talk, no individual European country can have a serious voice on the world stage without standing shoulder to shoulder with its continental allies. This isn’t new, Europe’s status decline was evident immediately after the Second World War, it was a bi-polar world with the UK, a poor third place, desperate to maintain relevance through a relationship with the USA and by clinging on to its Empire. Looking at the 21st century, the rise of China, India, Brazil and to some extent Russia will again significantly downsize the UK’s position in global standing. When Obama callled Cameron a lightweight, it was probably personal but it was also a pointed dig at his Euroscepticism, Obama’s belief that the UK’s position is as a big player through Europe but not a big player on its own.
Cameron has displayed some dangerous naivete on the world before, his attempt to cash in on world leader status and make Brown appear dithering, during the Georgia-Russia conflict was embarassing, he showed a totally one sided view that barely took into account Georgia’s foolish military stunts on South Ossetia, offered provokative language with no examples of what was to be done and then ordered Georgia’s application should be sped up – which would only anatagonise Russia’s position and put NATO in a precarious spot having to provide cover for Saakashvili’s loose cannon foreign policy.
His attempts to paint a new world order where Britain can retain relevance without Europe and the US have a similarly hollow tone . Undoubtedlythe UK has opportunities with India yet to be exploted but if Cameron thinks these can amount to replacing Europe he is drastically over-estimating the UK’s role in the 21st century. The UK’s economy is far more closely tied with both Europe and the US, our security issues frequently are far more closely aligned with the US and Europe, from border to security to terrorism and geo-strategic military interests. Like it or not , the UK is inextricably linked to its “old foes”, the old Commonwealth is over and India will engage with us not the other way round.
The challenges facing the UK in the 21st century will require European above all European solutions, not just border security, immigration and keeping open markets, some of the biggest issues will be challenges such as maintianging secure energy supplies in the face of Russi’a volatility, transforming European economic development to fulfil the Lisbon treaty and invest in a research driven Europe in the so-called ‘knowledge economy’, does Cameron think India or the US will help the UK out with this, does he not think that the UK and Europe are irrevocably bound by geography and now the European Union.
The Road ahead
Where does this leave David Cameron and the Conservatives? By leaving the EPP and attempting to pursue a form of Europe supported by a minority group can only leader to the UK’s isolation and irritate other European leaders.
An Economist article a while back made the point clearly, there was a time when the UK sent its best and brightest to Europe, not because they were passionate about Europe but to make sure they got what they wanted out of it, those days are gone, and as the Economist went onto point out this represents a strategic error.From experience this hasn’t worked out well for Britain, because other European leaders simply continue to develop European policy which Britain is then left out of, unable to convert its strength into leverage because it alienates its potential allies to score quick points in party politics and refuses to seriously engage with Europe.
Thatcher may have won domestic plaudits for her rebate but her Bruges speech in 1988 was an embarassing admissions of how out of touch with European feeling she was. While Europe can prove frustrating to the UK, issues such as the CAP , the nature and size of its bureacracy and yes its federalist implications, half-hearted detachment only weaken’s the UK’s ability to alter its direction. By leaving the EPP Cameron would not only be handicapping his relationship with other European leaders from the start but he would be weaken the UK’s long term ability to project its actual power into influence within Europe. One salient example is Blair’s attempt to reform the CAP, he had to give up the rebate just to gain a discussion of the CAP, yet had the UK been more engaged with Europe and cultivated alliances and policy positions, rather than pursue its childish semi0detachment Blair may have been more successful.
In reality, Cameron undoubtedly has some sort of fudged plan in mind, to appease both sides, but the future ahead looks set for a continuation of UK’s marginalisation in Europe, and that is of little good to anyone of its citizens.
