Opinion
Sweden's vote marks turning point for the EU
By Janet Bush
Will they ever listen? Sweden's decisive rejection of the euro - and by clear implication the tide of European political integration - was swatted aside, as usual, by Romano Prodi.
You cannot be in and out of Europe, the Commission President told the Swedes. Same goes for Britain. Outside the euro, you will lose influence. We will freeze you out. The European Union is now a take-it-or-leave it political entity. There is no scope any more for national choice based on democracy. The people are, quite simply, an aberration and a nuisance.
Join EUobserver today
Get the EU news that really matters
Instant access to all articles — and 20 years of archives. 14-day free trial.
Choose your plan
... or subscribe as a group
Already a member?
This is the politics of the playground bully.
The EU establishment has reached a pretty pass when the will of the people - whether it is expressed in Sweden, Denmark or Switzerland - is dismissed if that will rejects the project of "ever closer union" whose most important catalyst is the single currency. But if the people go with the flow, as in Estonia, that is acceptable. Who is Romano Prodi to make such a judgement? He is an appointed civil servant, engaged as the servant of the peoples of the EU, not as our master.
But let's not personalise this - the same critique goes for many of Europe's political leaders, representatives of Europe's nation states, who forget that they only have their jobs because of us, the people, when integration is challenged.
If the collective imperiousness of Europe's political elites continues, they will face a big shock. The cherished new constitution will fail to be ratified and the EU will become a fractured and fractious collection of states, wholly ineffective in projecting its interests and values in the world and useless as a counterbalance to the United States, the fond wish of so many integrationists.
Without the people's consent and enthusiasm, the EU signifies nothing.
It has to change and some of the more intelligent integrationists now recognise this.
I really believe that - despite the determination of the political establishment to bury bad news - the Swedish vote may signal the high water mark of the integrationist project and Europe will be the better for it.
There have only been two referendums explicitly on membership of the euro - in Denmark and Sweden - and both have been lost. In both these cases, business was squarely in favour of the euro along with large swathes of the political establishment, including the media. Yet the people rejected their blandishments (and in the case of Sweden, an overwhelming advertising spend by the Government).
The reason for voting no was not racism or xenophobia which at times seemed to be the main campaign theme chucked at no voters by the Swedish yes camp.
The no vote was based on evident rationality about the economic costs and benefits of euro entry and about the centralising direction of the EU political project. The Swedish people looked at a Eurozone which is stagnating, which has failed miserably to tackle mass unemployment and in which smaller countries with less clout are forced to comply with the budget restrictions of the Growth and Stability Pact while the large countries flout the rules with ever more reckless abandon. Then they looked at their own economy, with relatively healthy growth, low inflation and low unemployment as well as generous social and welfare provision. In all honesty, is it surprising that Sweden voters decided to stick with what they have?
And then there is the political unease. Sweden was told it would lose influence if it failed to join the euro - and yet a survey of top European diplomats found that Sweden was the fourth most effective Member State, punching way above its economic weight despite being outside the euro. Inside the euro, the fear of being sidelined by the bigger boys in the playground again appears to have ample justification.
All these arguments apply to Britain too and we now have a real prospect that there will be EU members in the euro permanently and EU members outside, permanently.
There is at least hope now that Europe will, despite the best efforts of the establishment, develop in a different way (although this will be far more difficult if the EU constitution is adopted, given its granting of legal primacy to the EU over national legislatures). It will have "flexible geometry"; Member States will opt into some cooperative policy areas and opt out of others, so reflecting their different political and social traditions. And so the EU will be strengthened - it might even start appealing to people.
As the Swedish people went to cast their votes on the euro last weekend, the World Trade Organisation meeting in Cancun was seeing something quite extraordinary. Finally, large developing countries such as India, China and Brazil stood up to the United States and the EU which have had their way on agricultural subsidies and punitive one-sided trading practice for too long. The WTO broke up, dramatically, without agreement. In Cancun and Sweden, the worm turned.
Both in our European politics and our world politics, I am allowing myself to think that the future looks that bit brighter after the events of the past few days.
Janet Bush is a journalist by training. She has worked for Reuters, The Financial Times and the Times. Since 1999, she has been Director of New Europe, under the Chairmanship of Lord Owen. In 2000, she became Director of the no campaign, an alliance between New Europe and Business for Sterling.
Disclaimer
The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author's, not those of EUobserver.