Great Britain and the EU
On June 23 the UK will vote on community integration and on the future of the Country. The referendum calls into question a great history, a great culture, a great democracy. After the contributions of Thomas Jansen and Stefan Lunte, continues the debate on the “Brexit”, promoted by SIR.
“We British have our own Commonwealth of Nations. These do not weaken, on the contrary they strengthen, the world organisation. They are in fact its main support. And why should there not be a European group which could give a sense of enlarged patriotism and common citizenship to the distracted peoples of this mighty continent? And why should it not take its rightful place with other great groupings and help to shape the honourable destiny of man? Therefore I say to you “Let Europe arise!” It was September 19, 1946: seventy years have gone by since Winston Churches delivered this speech at the University of Zurich. Looking out from the balcony of the building where he lived, he had raised his hat with his walking stick, and skillfully spun it in the air to greet the crowd. That image, however friendly, conveys to Europe two typically British attitudes: distance and proximity. They are not two irreconcilable positions. It’s not indifference. Rather, it’s a typical insular way of seeing and interpreting the continent.
From Churchill to Mrs. Thatcher. World scenarios have deeply changed since the end of World War II:
The Commonwealth no longer exists, although some traces of its spirit linger on. The armed conflict between European Countries belongs to a bygone past, but the idea that walls provide great security than bridges is gaining grounds.
Another signal was expressed by Margareth Thatcher in her speech at Bruges, on September 19 1988 to the College of Europe, with a memorable critical speech, albeit not discouraging, on the common European project. She said: “I believe it is not enough just to talk in general terms about a European vision or ideal”, the Iron Lady said in her concluding remarks. “If we believe in it, we must chart the way ahead and identify the next steps.” Perhaps, said European Parliament president Martin Schulz, in the book “The chained giant”, the aforementioned steps are not those that, as is happening now, encourage British eurosceptics “to question Great Britain’s EU membership.”
Distance and closeness. How can the British question on “distance and closeness” be addressed in a time marked by the severe fragility of common policies, by escalating Islamist terrorism, by the worrying globalization of indifference?
The UK knows only too well that abandoning a dangerous navigation does not automatically mean reaching a safe harbor.
What will be the future of Britain if an excess of identity claims and liberal sentiment, should make it stronger internally but weaker outside? British culture and history, which are of unquestionable greatness as unquestionably huge are the mistakes made by British policy in many areas of the world, should suggest thinking differently from Eurosceptic thought.
Identifying the signs of malaise. It is not a question of passing judgment but of identifying signs of malaise. Indeed, the exit from the EU of a great democracy would not be painless for neither of the parties involved. With regard to the referendum of 23 June – in which the British will be called to express their opinion on whether or not to remain in the EU – an article published a few days ago in the “The Tablet” states that it is necessary to keep at bay the demons inhabiting many European countries and the European Union as a whole, namely, nationalism, populism, bureaucracies and technocracies. The same article pointed out that
British people need “renewed thrust, a realistic vision of a Europe
that works for all its people and persuades them to believe in it.” That may not be the Europe of today, “The Tablet” underlined, “but Europe will not become that without Britain.”
The risk is a dead end road. Churchill and Mrs. Thatcher were aware of this, and their realism, notwithstanding the spirit of the island, had always kept them distant from the demons’ of the “isms”. It’s a lesson that deserves being acknowledged. Also today, said Martin Schulz, “those who have a scapegoat for all issues but never have a concrete solution, should not be trusted.” Britain is too wise to end up in a dead end road. That of June 23 more than a referendum on EU membership thus appears to be a referendum on Britain itself, on its culture, its history, its democracy: pages written and to be written with the authentic spirit of the island, not with that of ideological and demagogic demons.
