[E-rundbrief] Info 676 - Susan George - EU-treaty referendum

[Matthias Reichl]

E-Rundbrief - Info 676 - Zum Referendum über den EU-"Reform"-Vertrag in 
Irland am 12.6.2008; Susan George: Rejecting the Reform Treaty is the 
first step in building an alternative, progressive EU (interveiw by Eoin 
O'Broin); Wrong man, wrong Europe (on EU and Tony Blair); We the Peoples 
of Europe (Pluto Books)

Bad Ischl, 5.5.2008

Begegnungszentrum für aktive Gewaltlosigkeit

www.begegnungszentrum.at

================================================

Zum Referendum über den EU-"Reform"-Vertrag in Irland am 12.6.2008

Zwei Texte und ein Buch von Susan George:

Rejecting the Reform Treaty is the first step in building an
alternative, progressive EU

Eoin O'Broin interviews Susan George

Village, 8 January 2008

The French trade justice expert Susan George was hosted in Dublin last
November by The Campaign Against The EU Constitution, a coalition of
left wing groups and individuals established to oppose the original EU
Constitution. Ms Goerge spoke to Village about her experience in the
French campaign to oppose the Constitution in 2005, and her views on
both the defeated Constitution and the new Reform Treaty which will be
put before the Irish electorate in 2008. By Eoin O'Broin

Speaking about shock defeat of the EU Constitution by the French
electorate in 2005, trade justice expert Susan George, who led the 'No'
campaign, attributed the victory to "the spirit of the French
revolution, the spirit of the republic". She said the defeat of the
Constitution "was in the long line of French movements on the left
towards human emancipation. Once people found out what was actually in
the treaty, which was the hard part to get across, then it was quite
natural for them to vote no. It was a popular decision and it was a
class vote...working class and lower middle class people voted no. The
only social category that voted a majority for the yes was the mid to
upper managers and professionals."

When asked why France voted 'no' Susan George explained; "Well they
found objectionable the fact that the economy practically took up all of
the space in the Treaty. Maybe it was there before in different laws,
but it was all spread out and this was the first time that people became
aware of what was already there and they didn't like what they saw. It
was a blueprint for neo-liberal economics. It favored privitisation. It
gave no protection to public services. It didn't even call them public
services but services of general economic interest and subjected them to
competition. The word 'market' appears 78 times in the text. The phrase
'free and undistorted competition' was there many times also, the free
movements of goods, people, capital and services across the borders was
repeatedly emphasised, and this was expanded into trade issues with a
very heavy free trade bias. A lot of people don't agree with that."

"It was social systems in competition" Susan George continued, "It was
not just this French man against this Pole or Czech, it was whole social
systems placed in competition with each other. Though this may seem a
bit extreme and a bit of a departure from the text itself, I think what
was actually happening was an example of that old phrase, 'all for
ourselves and nothing for other people seems in every age of the world
to be the vile maxim of the masters of mankind'. Of course that is not
Karl Marx that is Adams Smyth. Adam Smyth knew one or two things about
the upper classes and capitalism and it seemed to many people, perhaps
not in those terms, but that this was the spirit if not the content of
the EU Constitution."

Fifty-five per cent of the French electorate voted against the EU
Constitution. The turnout was unprecedented for an EU poll, at 70 per
cent compared with the 42 per cent turnout in France for the 2004
European parliamentary elections. Susan George's experience of the
campaign was that it was different; "We had a terrific debate, it was
just amazing. People spontaneously formed collectives all over the
countries, where different interest groups came together, people active
in health campaigns, Catholic organisations, environmentalists, women's
groups, small farmers, some trade unionists, dissidents from the
Socialist and Green parties, people who had never done anything before
but recognised that they better stand up and be counted in this, that
this was going to be a last chance kind of affair...I hadn't seen
anything like it since may 1968. I think that all of a sudden people
discovered what European was about and they got scared."

The defeat of the constitution sent EU leaders back to the drawing
board. After an 18 month period of reflection they announced the Reform
Treaty which was agreed by the European Union's political leaders 19
October 2007. The 200 page document will be put to the Irish people in a
referendum in early 2008. Replacing the defeated EU Constitution, the
Reform Treaty contains a detailed series of changes to institutional,
procedural and policy matters within the EU.

Despite the claims of some, Susan George firmly believes that the Reform
treaty is no different to the Constitution, "Giscard d'Estaing [chair of
the Convention that drafted the Constitution] spilled the beans when he
published a piece in the French daily newspaper Le Monde right after
they had tabled this new so called Reform Treaty. He said this is
exactly the same as what we had done but they have made, and I quote
'cosmetic changes so that it will be easier to swallow'."

Susan George has spent her life researching, writing and campaigning on
issues of fair trade, developing world debt and global inequalities. She
is concerned about the implications of the Reform Treaty for the
developing world; "the relationship between developed Europe and the
south is going to profoundly change. They have slipped in an article
stating that one of Europe's objectives is that all countries engage to
a maximum in world trade. Europe would also have for the first time a
juridical personality. The EU would be an actor on its own without
having to consult with its member countries, so it would be able to push
through the kind of trade agreement that Peter Mandelson is trying to
negotiate right now with the African, Carribean and Pacific countries,
78 of the poorest countries in the world. He is pushing for a total
opening up of these countries markets, with no barriers to foreign
direct investment and no barriers to government procurement so European
countries would be able to bid on any government contract. Since October
2006 Mandelson has been trying to force developing countries to remove
what he calls 'beyond borders barriers' such as environmental
regulations, consumer protection regulations, health regulations. It's
the line he has been pushing at the World Trade Organisation. If the
Reform Treaty is passed he will use the new powers it provides to do
exactly as he pleases. That means that member state citizens, the people
from Trocaire for example, can complain all they like to the Irish
government, but the Irish government will not have the power to reverse
any future trade agreement."

Susan George describes herself as a European and argues that rejecting
the Reform Treaty is the first step in building an alternative,
progressive EU. " I want to open up some space," she says, "we have to
keep saying no until they get the point and we can sit down and have a
real discussion about the future of Europe... I would like to see a
separation of powers, a lot more power to the parliament, a central bank
that is not independent, much greater financial means, much more
encouragement for research and higher education, and obviously for
healthcare. Is this a utopian project? It is if we pass this Treaty,
which is why the Irish have a huge responsibility on their shoulders."

© Village

http://www.tni.org/detail_page.phtml?act_id=17768

---------------------------------------

Wrong man, wrong Europe

Susan George

Red Pepper, 3 April 2008

Referendums killed off the EU Constitution, a 'blackmail' that Europe's
elites will now avoid by forcing through the Lisbon Treaty without
debate, writes Susan George. And Tony Blair is just the man some of them
want to lead the way in this new Europe

Europeans are becoming accustomed to both insult and injury. For many
excellent and well-examined reasons, in mid-2005 French and Dutch voters
rejected the European Constitution. In France, it had been 13 years
since anyone had asked its citizens what they thought about Europe, and
they replied 55 per cent strong that it was going in an entirely wrong,
neoliberal, inequitable direction. Yes, there were some far-right 'No'
votes, but most came from pro-Europeans who refused to see Europe
reduced to the status of a marketplace.

This expression of popular sovereignty was intolerable to the elites.
They have now remedied the situation by forcing through the Lisbon
Treaty, a carbon copy of the constitution, with only 'cosmetic changes'
to 'make it easier to swallow', as former French president Valéry
Giscard d'Estaing phrased it. He should know, having drafted the
original document.

No official flag and no Beethoven hymn, but the rest is there. Don't
believe me -- listen to Giscard, Angela Merkel, Karel De Gucht, Giuliano
Amato, José-Luis Zapatero, Bertie Aherne and Jose-Manuel Barroso,
European leaders who all heaved huge, public sighs of relief to that
effect. As for the thoroughly undemocratic process that brought forth
the Lisbon Treaty, Gunther Verheugen, vice-president of the European
Commission, put it best after the French-Dutch votes: 'We must not give
in to blackmail'. They didn't. One thinks of Bertolt Brecht, who in 1951
said of the East German regime:

After the uprising of the 17th June
The Secretary of the Writer's Union
Had leaflets distributed in the Stalinallee
Stating that the people
Had forfeited the confidence of the government
And could win it back only
By redoubled efforts. Would it not be easier
In that case for the government
To dissolve the people
And elect another?

So the text of the treaty will be pushed through parliaments with no
time for discussion and debate. Nicolas Sarkozy himself told right-wing
Euro MPs that if there were referendums on the Lisbon Treaty, they would
be lost; if the French voted, they would again vote 'No'. Under no
circumstances should citizens be allowed referendums (and Ireland made a
huge mistake in making them compulsory).

Don't make the mistake of letting people actually read a clear text. The
Lisbon Treaty is what you get, like it or not, although we can't
actually give you a copy of it -- just five or six separate documents,
protocols and declarations that you can spend the next few years
collating and cross-referencing to your heart's content. Oh yes -- and
we've got just the man to lead the new Europe that this treaty intends
to force upon you: Tony Blair.

He's perfect for the job. We can count on him to promote 'a more
assertive Union role in security and defence matters [which] will
contribute to the vitality of a renewed Atlantic Alliance'. And he will
make sure that Europe 'respects the obligations under the North Atlantic
Treaty Organisation, which remains the foundation of the collective
defence of its members', according to Protocol 4 of the treaty (which,
like the other protocols and declarations has the same legal force as
the treaty and supersedes national law).

We don't know what Nato's future policies will be and are signing on
blindfolded. But we do know that the US will continue to lead it and
that the US president will be its de facto commander in chief. Who
better than Blair to polish the commander's medals and shine his [or
her] shoes?

The EU is terrific on market-oriented policies as well, and that can
only be to Blair's satisfaction. In the 410 treaty articles, the
'market' rates 63 references and 'competition' is cited 25 times.
'Social progress' gets three mentions, 'full employment' one and
'unemployment' none, but you can't have everything.

What you can have is a downgrading of social policy and of public
services. Any upwards harmonisation of EU social [or fiscal] policy will
require unanimity of the 27 members, so the pressure will be to reduce
taxes and social services. As for public services, they are specifically
made subject to competition. The treaty doesn't affect 'the competence
of member states to provide, commission and organise non-economic
services of general interest' and that may sound reassuring. The problem
is that 'non-economic services' are nowhere defined and in some
interpretations they could be reduced to the police and the courts. The
European Court of Justice has not shown undue affection for public
services and the Commission can also make members stop subsidising them,
so Blair should feel quite at home.

Among the many provisions of the constitution, the treaty has also
retained the Charter of Fundamental Rights, a meek and mild compendium
granting fewer rights than most national constitutions. However meagre,
this was still too much for Blair, who demanded -- and received -- an
exemption for the UK, enshrined in the lengthy and detailed Protocol 7.
All one can deduce from this is that in our brave new Europe, the rules
concerning market freedom and competition are compulsory, whereas
anything smacking of even limited human and social rights is optional.
Why should Blair's attitude as president of Europe reflect any other view?

If Europe still seems remote to you and not worth getting excited about,
you should know that 80 per cent or more of the laws that will apply to
you and your country will come not from the seat of your national
government but from Brussels. Let us hope that the petition against
Blair's presidency blazes its way through the 27 member states or that
Tony himself may decide to be content with the putative 500,000 quid he
will receive annually as a part-time advisor to the JP Morgan Chase
investment bank. If he jumps out of the British frying pan into the
Brussels fire, 450 million European citizens risk being severely burned.


Susan George is a Fellow and Chair of the Board of the Transnational
Institute. Her latest book is La Pensée enchaînée: Comment les droites
laïque et religieuse se sont emparées de l'Amérique [Fayard, 2007], to
be published in English as: Hijacking America: How the Religious and
Secular Right Changed What Americans Think [Forthcoming, Polity Press 2008].
www.tni.org/george

http://www.tni.org/detail_page.phtml?act_id=18121

-------------------------------------------------------------

Das Buch zu den beiden Intervews mit Susan George:

We the Peoples of Europe

SUSAN GEORGE

Translated by ROBERT BARRÉ

Pluto Books, 2008

Is the EU Constitution dead in the water?

Although it may have disappeared from the headlines, right-wing European
leaders have not given up on pushing through a binding EU text providing
total freedom for goods, services and capital but few advantages for
Europeans. A more neo-liberal anti-democratic document than the one
rejected by the French and the Dutch may be hard to imagine, but the new
reformed treaty tries hard. What do they have in store for us? What
should European people be fighting for?

Leading writer and alter-globalization activist Susan George explains
what is at stake for all peoples of Europe. What must we reject and how
will such a document affect our lives? Who will it really empower -
corporations or ordinary Europeans? What kind of future do we want to
build together as Europeans? Written with clarity and authority, We the
Peoples of Europe will help you make up your own mind.

SUSAN GEORGE has written widely on development issues for three decades.
She is an associate director of the Transnational Institute and the
author of several classic books including How the Other Half Dies, The
Debt Boomerang (Pluto Press), The Lugano Report (Pluto Press), Ill Fares
the Land, and, with Fabrizio Sabelli, Faith and Credit: The World Bank's
Secular Empire.

£ 11.99 / $22.95

ISBN 978-0-7453-2633-7

Publiziert im März 2008

(Text aus dem Katalog von Pluto Books 2008)

Ergänzungen:

Kapitelüberschriften:

Foreword by Robert Ballagh

Introduction

Timeline

1. The War on Society

2. They Voted Yes, or Surviving on a Diet of Humble Pie
   (Titel der Abschnitte:)
   Complexity and disinformation
   The "Yes" camp on the right
   The "Yes" camp on the "left"
   A few leading Socialist lights
   The Socialist Euro-MPs
   The European Trade Union Confederation
   The French Socialist Party brass
   Another prominent -. and snubbed - Socialist

3. The Common Good: Towards an Alternative Europe

4. Europe as a Geopolitical Power

5. The Environmental Challenge

6. Social Insecurity

-------------------------

Supported by:

Transnational Institute/ TNI: www.tni.org

Der weitere Unterstützer - ein linkes irisches Magazin - scheint im Buch
zwar unter:

Left Republican, Rep. of Ireland, www.leftrepublican.com

auf. Doch existiert diese Homepage nicht und auf mein e-mail an diesen
Mitherausgeber bekam ich keine Antwort. (Auch nicht von Susan George und
dem Pluto Books Verlag.)


-- 

Matthias Reichl, Pressesprecher/ press speaker,
Begegnungszentrum fuer aktive Gewaltlosigkeit
Center for Encounter and active Non-Violence
Wolfgangerstr. 26, A-4820 Bad Ischl, Austria,
fon: +43 6132 24590, Informationen/ informations,
Impressum in: http://www.begegnungszentrum.at
Spenden-Konto Nr. 0600-970305 (Blz. 20314) Sparkasse Bad Ischl,
Geschäftsstelle Pfandl
IBAN: AT922031400600970305 BIC: SKBIAT21XXX