Advertising

The Seattle Times Company

NWjobs | NWautos | NWhomes | NWsource | Free Classifieds | seattletimes.com

Editorials / Opinion


Our network sites seattletimes.com | Advanced

Originally published Tuesday, June 17, 2008 at 12:00 AM

Print

Editorial

Irish vote to remain Irish

By their 53 percent "no" vote rejecting the Lisbon Treaty, the Irish have stuck a pin in the dream of European political oneness.

By their 53 percent "no" vote rejecting the Lisbon Treaty, the Irish have stuck a pin in the dream of European political oneness.

They are expressing a deep feeling, and the elites of the West need to hear it. Instead, we hear Germany's interior minister, Wolfgang Schäuble, saying, "A few million Irish cannot decide on behalf of 495 million Europeans." Maybe they should. The Irish government was the only one of 27 in the European Union to allow its people a vote on the treaty. None of the others dared.

In 2005, an earlier version of the treaty, then called the European constitution, was scheduled to be voted on in several member states. Voters in Spain and Luxembourg favored it. Then the French turned 55 percent against it and, three days later, the Dutch were 62 percent against. The remaining plebiscites were promptly canceled and the treaty sent back for a rewrite.

It is notable that the rewrite has been rejected by the Irish. Their island has benefited enormously from the open trade and investment in the European Union, and its people know it. But this vote was not about trade or even about the euro currency, which Ireland already has. It is about steps toward political union.

The new treaty would create a European president, foreign minister and diplomatic corps. It would sweep away national vetoes in cross-border police matters and make it easier to pass Europe-wide laws.

Of course, all the main political parties in Ireland were for it, as they were in France three years ago. Politicians see benefit in it. The people don't.

The International Herald Tribune reported the Irish felt the EU bureaucracy was "remote, undemocratic and ever more inclined to strip the smaller members of the right to make their own laws and decide their own future."

Were the Irish wrong about that? Probably not.

Consider how controversial the North American Free Trade Agreement remains after more than 10 years — and it covers economics only. NAFTA has benefited Americans, though if it were put to a vote, it might still lose.

If Americans were asked to jettison the essentials of political sovereignty the Dutch, the French, the Irish and others have been asked to surrender, the answer would be unreservedly "no."

Copyright © 2008 The Seattle Times Company

NEW - 12:45 AM
Leonard Pitts Jr. / Syndicated columnist: The peril of lower standards in the 'new journalism'

George Will / Syndicated columnist: Huckabee's detour from reason in Obama theory

Lance Dickie / Seattle Times editorial columnist: Empower health care reform close to home

Rewind | Seattle Times Editorial Board interviews school officials

Leonard Pitts Jr. / Syndicated columnist: When punishment is a crime

Advertising

Video

Marketplace

 
Most read
Most commented
Most e-mailed
 
 

Most viewed imagesMore

Advertising