Intergovernmental
Conference Convenes in Brussels
The Intergovernmental Conference (IGC) of the member
states of the European Union was officially convened in Brussels on Monday. Its
stated purpose is to prepare the institutions of the EU to allow for
enlargement. It is scheduled to continue its work until December this
year.
Its terms of reference are defined as follows: to consider
the size and composition of the European Commission, the weighting of the
Member States’ votes and the possible extension of qualified-majority
voting within the Council. Further amendments to the Amsterdam Treaty may be
considered where they relate to the way the EU institutions function. This
means to say that the "weighting" of the votes of the big power
states – Britain, France and Germany – may be increased to offset the
effect of the influx of new members and ensure that the big powers do not get
outvoted. What is also under consideration is that this method of voting, the
"qualified-majority voting", be extended at the expense of the
arrangement where each member state has an equal vote. This may be particularly
the case with the Commission, which currently votes in secret on a simple
majority. The member states could then all have one commissioner each. At
present, the larger states have two commissioners. Britain, for example, has
Chris Patten and Neil Kinnock.
At present there are six candidate member states as the
European Union is set to expand eastwards to the borders of the former member
states of the Soviet Union. These candidates are Poland, the Czech Republic,
Hungary, Slovenia, Estonia and Cyprus. A further seven states have been
accepted as being able to apply for membership, the largest of which is Turkey.
Robin Cook yesterday made a statement in the House of
Commons supporting the enlargement to coincide with the publication of a
government White Paper, "Reform for Enlargement". He made no secret
of Britain’s enthusiasm for an enlarged European Union dominated by the
values of liberalisation and the free market, of a multi-party parliamentary
system, and rights based on private ownership of the means of production being
paramount. These Anglo-American and Eurocentric economic and political systems
and the values which they embody are becoming ever more familiar in their
repetition by the Robin Cooks and Madeleine Albrights, buoyed up by their
ill-founded belief that history is going their way.
Robin Cook said in his statement: "Throughout Central
and Eastern Europe, countries that have only recently emerged from a
centralised state and a command economy are making heroic efforts and taking
painful decisions to prepare themselves for membership of the European
Union." He spelled out why it is in "our" interest – that
is, the interests of the bourgeoisie of Britain – that these countries
"face up to the conditions of membership". It is, he said, "Not
only because they will be better trading partners for British exporters and
investors. But because the reforms they have to make are of direct benefit to
us." He was being disingenuous when he gave as an example that three of
the candidates, as a condition of membership, are "committed to the early
closure of nuclear reactors which do not meet our standards of safety".
Robin Cook undoubtedly also had other reforms in mind, but even here the
chauvinism that the "British" are superior shines through. He went
on: "Europe must also embrace economic reform to meet the challenge of
competitiveness in a global age," taking up the theme of globalisation
that runs through the foreign policy which the Labour government is developing.
Robin Cook was also at pains to stress the importance of
the big powers being able to throw their weight around, and flout the
democratic principle that in an international forum, each member state should
participate on an equal basis. This alone goes a long way to exposing the
European Union as a bloc of the European monopolies, as a tool in their hands,
a reality that is only obscured by any talk of a "People’s
Europe", which, however, does not much pass Robin Cook’s lips these
days. Cook clearly dreams of a British domination of Europe, as is confirmed by
his stated megalomanic foreign policy of "stronger in Europe, stronger in
the world".
So in his statement, the Foreign Secretary said,
"Britain welcomes the opportunity of enlargement for institutional reform.
For the United Kingdom, the most pressing of these reforms is to increase the
share of our vote in the Council of Ministers. France, Germany and Britain
contain a majority of the population of the Union but together have only a
minority of the votes in the Council. After enlargement, they will not even be
a blocking minority. We will be seeking a fairer [sic!] voting system in
the Council of Ministers which gives more democratic recognition to the
population of Britain." He went on, "As a first step in containing
the size of the Commission, we are prepared to consider that the larger
countries should retain only one Commissioner. This would enable the smaller
countries each to retain their own Commissioner, at least through the first
wave of enlargement. However, I stress that we see these two measures as a
package. The larger member states cannot be expected to give up their second
Commissioner if they are not given a larger weight of votes in the Council of
Ministers." He deals with the issue of situations which at present require
unanimity among the member states. He says, "There is double the risk of
decisions being blocked if there are double the number of other countries round
the table with a veto. Those decisions that are blocked may well be decisions
that are in Britain’s national interest and on which we want
agreement."
Having dealt with the risk that equality between all states
might break out in the enlarged EU, Robin Cook then rejoices in the prospect of
a "Reunion of Europe". The result of such a reunion "will be a
Union that stretches from Portugal to Poland. A single market of five hundred
million consumers with a combined GDP of five thousand billion pounds –
the largest single market anywhere in the world." Such a vision, which is
almost Hitlerite in its resonances, the Foreign Secretary finds very exciting.
This is because, "We have no doubt that faced with the prospect of a wider
united Europe Britain’s place is playing a leading part in it and shaping
its direction." It is because "it is in the national interest of
Britain to be both a leading advocate of enlargement and a leading partner in a
reformed and reunited Europe".
Having agreed to consolidate its Common Foreign and
Security Policy at the Helsinki Summit last December, which gave impetus to the
European Union also developing as a military superpower, the EU with its IGC is
now preparing to consolidate itself even further as a united political and
economic bloc in the conditions of escalating globalisation. The point is, who
is to dominate this Europe of the monopolies. This is where the contention
between the big powers is extremely fierce. To dominate Europe is potentially
to dominate the globe. Robin Cook salivates at the prospect, but should also
know that other powers too – the US, Germany, France – have their
ambitions in this direction. Is Robin Cook leaving out of his reckoning also
the growing power of Asia, of Japan, of China? It is certain that Cook is aware
of the importance of pacifying any opposition at home to his ambitions, which
are redolent of a 19th century imperialist power. But here also he leaves out
of the reckoning the repugnance of the working class to chauvinism, to
exploitation and its aspiration for justice, equality and socialism. The
working class is opposed to globalisation and to the European Union of the
monopolies, but it upholds internationalism, the equality of nations, and the
right of peoples to self-determination. All democratic people must intensify
their opposition to the reactionary enlargement of the European Union, and
Britain’s role within it, which is gathering apace.
