article Related Topics:
Euroscepticism
 

Euroscepticism is scepticism about, or disagreement with, existing and many proposed future issues concerning the European Union, sometimes coupled with a wish to preserve national sovereignty as opposed to a wish to build a federalistic EU-based nation state.

Eurosceptic influences on European politics

Euroscepticism is generally stronger in Northern European countries, including member-states UK, Sweden, and Denmark, all of which have, for example, declined to further their participation in the Economic and Monetary Union as much as the other EU member states. Non-members Norway and Iceland and (further to the south) Switzerland, especially the German-speaking cantons, have also shown a marked reluctance to expand ties with the EU or accept membership.

According to Eurobarometer surveys, fewer than 3 in 10 citizens of the UK and Sweden feel their countries have benefited from membership of the EU. Most continental European countries tend to be more pro-European, although eurosceptic movements exist in all European countries in some form. Among the new member states who acceded in 2004, the Czech Republic is the most eurosceptic.

Euroscepticism is likely to have been a factor (at least in part) of:

A noted Norwegian eurosceptic during the Treaty of Maastricht negotiations was Anne Enger Lahnstein, representing Senterpartiet.

Eurosceptic issues

The issues on which eurosceptics focus vary from country to country.

In European countries outside the EU, eurosceptics focus attention on the perceived disadvantages of Union membership; for instance, in the case of Norway, the greatest concern is the effect of the EU's Common Fisheries Policy. In those countries which are already members, but have chosen to retain independent currencies (the United Kingdom, Denmark and Sweden), eurosceptics focus on the disadvantages of euro membership as well as on other aspects of involvement with the EU. Some arguments against the Economic and Monetary Union are built on complaints that the Growth and Stability Pact has been inconsistently applied, and on the recent underperformance of the eurozone when compared with those economies that have chosen to remain outside.

While many eurosceptics take issue with particular characteristics of the EU as it stands, some maintain in principle that the very concept of the EU is an invention of bureaucrats seeking to create a bureaucratic and undemocratic superstate (or even dictatorship).

Centralisation

Eurosceptics oppose the idea of a centralised European superstate, a United States of Europe akin to the U.S., which many see as the inevitable outcome of current integrationist trends. This is a perception disputed by most, but by no means all, pro-Europeans.

Compromising sovereignty

Eurosceptics often disagree with current or proposed measures that they see as compromising national sovereignties, including:
  • the proposed European Rapid Reaction Force
  • the draft European Constitution
  • the proposed establishing of a European Public Prosecutor, or the establishing of Eurojust
  • any extension of Europol to include enforcement powers
  • harmonising taxation or welfare benefits
  • reduction to the number of policy areas subject to agreement by unanimity in the European Council, where each country may veto proposed legislation.

Eurosceptics often propose either radical modifications to the structure of the EU, including more influence for national parliaments, or the withdrawal of their country from the Union altogether.

Harmonising of justice and home affairs

Eurosceptics generally consider the harmonising of criminal justice systems in Europe unnecessary. They dispute pro-Europeans' claims that enhanced judicial co-operation could provide additional protection against terrorists or organised criminal gangs. They believe that moves towards centralised decisions on issues of justice and law are examples of the EU's lack of choice and poor cultural awareness.

While most eurosceptics acknowledge that all current systems of justice in the EU offer adequate protection despite their differences, others, including members of the British Parliament, contend that common law systems of justice are incompatible with civil law systems which, according to them, do not provide enough protections with respect to presumption of innocence and other guarantees. (These guarantees, however, are laid out in the European Convention of Human Rights, which all EU members must sign.)

Euroscepticism in France

1970s

In 1978, Jacques Chirac, a rival of then president Valéry Giscard d'Estaing, published the Call of Cochin in which he clearly alluded to Giscard's party as the "party of the foreigners". Giscard is a well-known pro-European.

Recent events

On the left of the political spectrum, the Parti des Travailleurs, Jean-Pierre Chevènement and the French Communist Party are eurosceptic. They see the European Union as a means through which unpopular economic measures of free markets, free trade, the gradual demolition of public services and Social security and increasing technocracy, all of which they see as part of a right-wing agenda, are imposed on the French public. The Left is split along similar lines on the topic of the proposed European Constitution: the Communist Party, and parts of the Socialist Party, oppose the Constitution as carving ultra-libéral free market policies in stone; but the majority of the Socialist party considers the constitution an improvement, according to an internal vote.

On the right, Jean-Marie Le Pen (Front National) and Philippe de Villiers are eurosceptic. They are against compromising French independence and the possible integration into the European Union of countries that they contend are not European in essence, such as Turkey. Le Pen is also opposed to the Common Agricultural Policy and would rather have protectionist measures against imports of foreign agricultural products into France, and other imports as well. While the integration of Turkey is supported by president Jacques Chirac, it is opposed by many, including Nicolas Sarkozy, head of Chirac's supporting party, the UMP.

Euroscepticism in the Netherlands

The Netherlands used to be one of the most enthusiastic countries in favour of Europe unification until 2002. The introduction of the euro was very popular in the Netherlands in 2001 with 2/3 of the population supporting it. Scepticism started in 2002 when the prices in the shops and bars rose enormously. Many Dutch people blamed the euro for this. Since 2002, the Netherlands became more proud of their nation. The expansion of the European Union with ten poor eastern European countries in 2004 was unpopular in the Netherlands. The European constitution was rejected by the Dutch in 2005 by a vast majority of the population despite the support of it by the main political parties. The European enthusiasm of Dutch politicians of before 2002 was exchanged for a policy of demanding tax reduction to Brussels and strong defence of the Dutch interests. Agitated European politicians regarded the support of Dutch politicians for the anti-European sentiments of their population as an uncooperative Calvinist attitude. Most Dutch people support the European Union, but are against too much power for the European institutions.

Euroscepticism in the United Kingdom

The debate around euroscepticism has been a major political issue in the United Kingdom since the inception of the European Union (then the European Economic Community or EEC), and has not reduced significantly following UK membership of the Union.

Eurosceptic views in the UK today

Many people in Britain feel poorly informed about the European Union. Partly because of this widespread unfamiliarity with the fundamentals of the organisation, there is a wariness of its institutions, processes and policies.

Eurosceptics regard the EU as lacking in democratic process, overburdened with bureaucracy, and threatening to national sovereignty. Most of the UK's mainstream magazines and newspapers, notably a tabloid press dominated by interests sceptical of the European Union such as those of Rupert Murdoch, carry what some see as partisan coverage of EU laws and policy. Some commentators argue that this coverage contributes greatly to eurosceptic views; others contend that it simply reflect the views of the readership.

British eurosceptics are often against political and bureaucratic centralisation while remaining in favour of other pan-European measures such as a free trade area.

Eurosceptics point out that the EU is frequently good at professing high ideals, but poor at delivering on things. The failure to make any appreciable progress on the Lisbon Strategy is cited as one example.

Some British eurosceptics, including Members of Parliament, maintain the superiority of British institutions, traditions and methods with respect to those of neighbouring countries, and argue that harmonisation would be culturally insensitive. For instance, with respect to European judicial integration, they claim (controversially) that the civil law systems found on the Continent do not provide comparable presumption of innocence and other protections. Many eurosceptics in the UK are against the state funding of European political parties.

Eurosceptics argue that as the fourth largest economy in the world (by nominal GDP, 16.5% of the European Union, behind Germany and before France) and a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, the United Kingdom has very substantial influence. They also observe that there is no simple correlation between the size of a political entity and its success, pointing out that there are several democratic and prosperous small countries, and several unstable, undemocratic or impoverished large ones.

They see the European Union as anachronistic for its attempts to politically and economically unite a whole continent, arguing that the penchant for centralised blocs is increasingly outdated in a world where globalisation and localism are the main competing economic philosophies. Additionally, they claim that most Britons have few cultural or social links with Europe, and feel closer to the spirit of the Anglosphere. The journalist Jeremy Paxman goes even further, arguing in his book "The English" that it is a dislike of 'funny foreigners' and an 'island mentality' that is at the root of English (though not necessarily British) anti-European feelings.

Recent UK polls show that the majority of the British electorate:

  • is opposed to UK membership in the euro;
  • does not feel well informed about the proposed new European constitution (recent polls have suggested a roughly even split on whether to accept or reject it *);
  • but does not want to leave the EU altogether.

Eurosceptics in UK political parties

The debate between Eurosceptics and pro-Europeans is ongoing in British political parties whose membership is of varied standpoints. The two main political parties in Britain, the governing Labour Party and the opposition Conservative Party, both have within them a broad spectrum of views concerning the European Union.

In the Conservative Party, debate over Europe has been ongoing since the 1970s, sometimes to the detriment of other issues. A particular tipping point for British Conservatism came in the period 1987-1988 when leading Conservatives - including the then Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher - realised that the European question was no longer (if it had ever been) just about an extension of the free market. Thatcher's Bruges speech in September 1988 and the subsequent formation of the Bruges Group galvanised this emerging opinion. One may argue that a reverse process was happening within the Labour Party during the same period.

Currently, euroscepticism is a significant current of opinion within the Conservative Party, to an extent perceived to be greater than in any comparably important political party in any other EU member state (but this is to be expected in a country where a large proportion of the population is eurosceptic). Pro-European elements on the left of the Conservative Party also suffered disproportionately more when marginal constituencies were lost in the 1997 General Elections.

However, many commentators believe over-interest in the issue to be an important reason why the Conservative Party lost the General Election of 2001. They argue that the British electorate was more influenced by domestic issues than by European affairs. This is said to be illustrated by the poor performance of the breakaway Pro-Euro Conservative Party in the 1999 European elections, although there is little track record of success generally for breakaway parties in the United Kingdom.

After the electoral defeat of the UK Conservatives in 2001, the issue of eurosceptism was important in the contest to elect a new party leader. The winner, Iain Duncan Smith, was seen as more eurosceptic than his predecessor and concern was expressed that his victory could result in an inflammation of the issue within the party.

As opposition leader, Iain Duncan Smith attempted to disaffiliate the British Conservative Members of the European Parliament from the federalist European People's Party Group. As MEPs must maintain a pan-European alliance to retain parliamentary privileges, Duncan Smith sought the merger of Conservative MEPs into the eurosceptic Union for a Europe of Nations (UEN) group. Conservative MEPs vetoed this move because of the presence within the UEN of representatives of neo-fascist parties who do not share similar domestic politics. In 2004, Duncan Smith's successor, Michael Howard, emphasised that Conservative MEPs would remain in the EPP Group so as to maintain influence in the European Parliament. During the post-Howard leadership election, Michael Howard's successor David Cameron, pledged to withdraw Conservative MEPs from the EPP Group as soon as possible. In July 2006, Cameron confirmed the MEPs would withdraw from the EPP Group but only in 2009.

The governing Labour Party is also split into eurosceptic and pro-European factions. Historically, the party tended towards euroscepticism, indeed the 1975 Labour Conference voted to leave the EEC (Tony Benn was the leading Labour anti-common market politician at the time and remains an important left-wing EU-critic). But today under Prime Minister Tony Blair its policies are generally pro-European. However, a significant minority of Labour MPs have formed the Labour Against the Euro group, opposing British membership of the single currency. The group has support from minority parts of the Trade Union movement, while the majority of trade unions remain staunchly pro-European.

The UK's third-largest parliamentary party, the Liberal Democrats, is strongly pro-EU.

The United Kingdom Independence Party, which advocates the UK's complete withdrawal from the European Union, received 16% of the vote and gained 12 MEPs in the 2004 European Election. The party was subsequently weakened by a leadership struggle and the defection of prominent member Robert Kilroy Silk. In the following General Election of 2005 neither UKIP nor Kilroy-Silk's new Veritas party succeeded in gaining a substantial percentage of the vote, or any seats in parliament.

The Scottish National Party has tended to be Europhile since the 1980s, however, for some the example of Norway has encouraged a Eurosceptic Scottish independence movement. This has found some separate expression in the Free Scotland Party, founded by a formerly prominent member of the SNP, Brian Nugent. As the SNP's heartlands tend to be in fishing and farming areas of Scotland, they have been seen as a real threat to the Europhile SNP. However, this has not yet emerged. Polls show a significant amount of Euroscepticism in Scotland, but neither UKIP nor the Conservatives are very powerful there.

Eurosceptic British press

In the UK, many newspapers, notably the Daily Mail and the Rupert Murdoch newspapers (The Sun, the News of the World, The Times and The Sunday Times), are eurosceptic along with the broadsheet Daily Telegraph and Sunday Telegraph, and have published many stories highly critical of the European Union and its policies. The accuracy or otherwise of these stories is hotly disputed, and in some cases the actions of international bodies with no connection to the EU have been attributed to it. Examples include headlines such as "Ludicrous EU officials ready to ban yogurt", The Daily Telegraph, 10 November 2003, where there were simply proposals on standard labelling and these proposals were initiated by the UK government, and reports in several UK papers in March 2000 that the EU planed to 'reduce' UK condoms to European sizes, when it was in fact the European Standardisation Committee (CEN) which proposed labelling changes, an organisation with no connection to the EU. In response, the European Commission has created a website dedicated to explaining its point of view. *

Pro-Europeans allege that some coverage of the European Union by UK tabloids is xenophobic, particularly through what they sometimes regard as conscious attempts to influence British politics by denigrating foreign countries (Such as Daily Express's article about renaming Waterloo Station in London, as it could offend the French *}. Many eurosceptics reject this allegation as a slur. Tony Blair, the British Prime Minister recently said to Jose Manuell Barroso "See what I have to put up with?" regarding the British Press' unfavourable cover of the EU Budget 2007-2013.

The daily newspaper of the hard-left, The Morning Star (connected to the Communist Party of Britain) takes an internationalist, Marxist eurosceptic position. Under the Editorship of Mark Seddon, Tribune, the journal of the Labour Movement, tended to give space to eurosceptic contributors, including controversially, Marc Glendening of the Democracy Movement. This position was defended by other centre-left eurosceptics who also spoke on platforms with the Democracy Movement once the Democracy Movement had successfully given direct assurances that it was not xenophobic, racist or sympathetic to extreme nationalists.

Euroscepticism in Denmark

Most of the Danish population is relatively enthusiastic about European initiatives of an economic nature, such as a free trade zone, but much less so about social policy . Enthusiasm for the project has declined slightly since the 1970s when Denmark first joined.

Worries in Denmark generally concentrate on the possible erosion of the Danish social safety net under EU guidance, and perhaps more importantly, the subversion of Danish identity in a large community of powerful nations. Danish nationalism, since the late 19th century has focused on the specialness of Denmark's "smallness" and the value of local customs and traditions. The notion of a powerful, centralised EU runs counter to this now entrenched and powerful sense of national identity .

Despite the influence of big business, which is generally europhile, Denmark has resisted inclusion in the euro.

Euroscepticism in Central and Eastern Europe

One common argument raised by eurosceptics in the new EU member states from Central Europe is that the European Union's bureaucracy and perceived socialist tendencies may be sustainable for mature Western European economies, but will bring the still fragile post-communist economies to a grinding halt. These viewpoints have often been encouraged when governments tried to excuse increases to the fiscal burden as harmonizing law with EU requirements, even when those laws had not been introduced for old EU member countries. Pro-Europeans argue the increased regulatory burden is feasible through post-accession increased economic growth, and that now inside the EU they will be able to help reform it.

Other issues include the need for new entrants to initiate EU-level border controls with non-accession neighbours. This has a big impact on the Poland's border with Ukraine. The introduction of the EU's visa regime has often greatly reduced cross-border trade with these neighbours, thus bankrupting many small family business in one of the poorest regions of Poland. Some consider Poland's joining the EU to be an act of disloyalty towards Ukraine, ultimately pushing it further into the Russian sphere of influence. Many economists believe that, on a country wide level, these disadvantages will eventually be offset by the freedom to travel and do business across the EU, though the benefits may be distributed unequally.

The Czech president Václav Klaus is Central Europe's most outspoken eurosceptic or, more precisely, a self-described eurorealist. He believes that democracy cannot work at a supernational level. He has warned Europe of "dream world" woes:

The enemies of free societies today are those who want to burden us down again with layer upon layer of regulations. We had that in communist times. But now if you look at all the new rules and regulations of EU membership, layered bureaucracy is staging a comeback.

Other criticisms of the European Union are related to its inability to prevent the recent increase in ethnic nationalism across Eastern Europe; the example of Kosovo is often cited. The EU is sometimes accused of trying to impose models that worked in the Western European countries without any regard for the different reality of Eastern European life, and it is claimed that this approach produces more problems than it solves.

Some Romanians, Slovaks and Croatians claim that the irredentism of Hungary has found a new platform built by the European Union in Eastern Europe. Alleged irredentist Hungarian politicians (among them Viktor Orbán, ex-prime-minister) are claimed to be helped by European regulations in involving themselves in the internal affairs of neighbouring countries. The main practice denounced is that Hungary is trying use the legitimate concept of ethnic minority rights in order to promote various forms (mostly subtle) of revanchism in the region. The claim is supported by Hungary's amending the status law trying to redefine the idea of nation and extending special economic, social and cultural benefits to ethnic Hungarians in neighbouring states (Romania, Slovakia, Croatia and Ukraine), who had objected to the law in 2001. The European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission), a body of the Council of Europe, was called in by Romania and criticised the Hungarian initiative. However, this did not stop Hungary from pursuing its intentions which, in the opinion of affected Eastern Europeans, is another proof of Europe's inability to handle the ethnic nationalism in Eastern Europe.

Eurosceptics in the European Parliament

In 2004, 37 MEPs from the UK, Poland, Denmark and Sweden founded a new European Parliament group called "Independence and Democracy" from the old Europe of Democracies and Diversities (EDD) group. The main goals of this group are to reject the Treaty establishing a constitution for Europe and to oppose further European integration. Some delegations within the group, notably the United Kingdom Independence Party, advocate the complete withdrawal of their country from the EU.

The group's leaders are Nigel Farage of UKIP (10 MEPs), Jens Peter Bonde of Denmark, and Maciej Giertych of the League of Polish Families (Liga Polskich Rodzin, LPR) (10 MEPs).

The right-wing Union for Europe of the Nations Group is also eurosceptic as are some parties within the left-wing Confederal Group of the European United Left - Nordic Green Left and the European Greens - European Free Alliance. The UK's largely eurosceptic Conservative Party are part of the European People's Party and European Democrats which has mainly a pro-European agenda.

Terminology

The appropriate use of the term eurosceptic is sometimes disputed by those on both sides of the pro-/anti-EU debate. Eurosceptics who feel that their position should emphasise a desire for greater national and parliamentary independence over specific criticisms of the EU sometimes argue that the positive-sounding antonym pro-European contrasts with the more negative eurosceptic, giving a rhetorical advantage to those who advocate European integration.

In order to avoid this, euro-realist has been coined as an alternative. However, in recent years this term has sometimes come to denote a milder form of euroscepticism, according to which it is not necessarily in countries' interests to withdraw from the EU or disband it completely, but rather to modify its structure to some extent.

Other synonyms that are sometimes encountered include euro-critic and the much more pejorative europhobe. The simple adjective anti-EU can also be used.

Many eurosceptics dissaprove of the term pro-Europeans to denote their opponents. They maintain that their pro-democracy ideology is more 'pro-Europe' than the federalist position. They prefer to call their opponents 'europhiles' or euro-fantics and their philosophy as pro-EU, federalist, integrationist or euro-centralist.

It should be noted that there are at least two types of eurosceptic. These are the 'withdrawalists' who advocate leaving the EU and the 'reformists' who wish the EU to be wholly transformed. Both of these types of eurosceptic may be found on the right and left of the political spectrum. A third type of eurosceptic would be those that want the EU to be dismantled and replaced by new geo-political arrangements.

Criticism of the European Union by non-Europeans

As the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe declares the Falkland Islands and South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands to belong to the British overseas territory the Argentinian parliament adopted a resolution declining the treaty. The Rio Group supports the Argentinian resolution.

Eurosceptism from Religious Groups

The EU has recieved strong criticism from members of some religious groups, most notably evangelical Christians with dispensationalist views. complain that the EU is rooted too strongly in secular humanism and undermines traditional Christianity with its policies. Some go as far to describe the EU as the beginnings of the one-world empire foretold in Bible prophecy. It is believed that such an empire will eventually be led by a single ruler, the Antichrist. Arguements for this view include the apparent occultic significance of EU symbolism*," target="_blank" >the refusal to mention God in official documents[http://www.religioustolerance.org/const_eu.htm and the effort to encourage the people of Europe to reject their national identity in favour of a European one.

Defence of Eurosceptism

Many holding eurosceptic views would say that they are not "anti-Europe" or "anti-EU" in itself, but that they take a more practical, realistic and objective view of the purposes of the EU and the lengths to which they feel they and their EU member state should be involved. Holders of so-called "pro-European" views are frequently viewed by eurosceptics as being too idealistic, academic and theoretical in their ideas of what is desirable and practical with regards to cooperation amongst nation states. A more extreme view occasionally expressed against "pro-European" politicians is that they are playing a game to get their name into history books: it is more statesmanlike to "build a European nation" than not to, but the reality (so such eurosceptic views hold) is that they are effecting change for changes sake and not for any purpose of furthering the common good and/or doing what electorates want.

See also

External links

The debate on the political future (and present) of Europe is extremely passionate.

Studies of public opinion

Eurosceptic sites

Specific criticisms of the EU

Euroscepticism rebuttals

Other useful sites

European Union | Euroscepticism | Foreign relations of the United Kingdom | Political neologisms

Europaskepsis | Euroescepticismo | יורופוביה | Eurosceptycyzm | Euroscepticism | Euroskepticism

 

This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the "Euroscepticism".

Home Page • arts • business • computers • games • health • hospitals • home • kids & teens • news • physicians • recreation• reference • regional • science • shopping • society • sports • world