Nice Dissent From Ireland

---

On December 11, 2000, an important European Treaty was nearing completion. On this day, the political leaders of the European Union were gathered in secret meetings in the city of Nice to reach agreement on the Nice Treaty. The Treaty was agreed to by the European leaders, who were securely hidden from the presence of tens of thousands of uninvited protestors, and now had to be signed by representatives of the 15 member states.

The Foreign Ministers of the 15 member states signed the Nice Treaty during a ceremony on February 26, 2001. All that was left at this point was ratification by each country. This would not be a difficult process, since 14 of the 15 countries of the European Union could ratify the Treaty through parliamentary approval alone. So, the Nice Treaty was quickly ratified by the great majority of member states (the Treaty is still being reviewed within the Belgian Parliament). There was just one small obstacle remaining and this was the Republic of Ireland.

The ratification of the Nice Treaty required an amendment to the Irish Constitution, which therefore needed the approval of the Irish people in a referendum set for June 7, 2001. The Irish establishment supported the Treaty, as defeat in the referendum would pose a serious threat to the political and financial leaders of Ireland. Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael, the two largest political parties, urged the Irish people to pass the referendum. Political leaders of other European countries advised the Irish to do the same. The Catholic Church told its members to pass the Treaty. The leaders of the major trade unions encouraged their workers to accept the Treaty. The national media provided its support from day one. Economic and financial experts warned of the dire consequences of rejecting the referendum, stating that Ireland needed the Treaty—the Irish people should do what they were being told.

But they didn’t. Despite the determinations of every elite section of Irish society, the Irish people voted 54 percent to 46 percent against the Treaty. The result was an enormous success for grassroots activists throughout the country and proved their campaign struck a chord with the Irish people. As for the supporters of the Treaty, no time was wasted in attacking the Irish vote. The mass media throughout Europe labeled Irish voters as “mad” and “selfish.” The Catholic Church and trade union leaders were publicly humbled and questioned the public’s decision.

Irish political leaders are calling a second referendum on the Nice Treaty asking voters to change their minds in the October general election. The reaction to the Irish rejection of the Treaty shows that dissent from the European Union’s planned development is unacceptable and analysis of the Nice Treaty illustrates exactly what this development entails.

Before Irish voters made their decision in June 2001, two central themes dominated the public debate on the Nice Treaty, European enlargement and Irish neutrality. Supporters of the Treaty stressed the importance of European enlargement and guaranteed the continuance of Irish neutrality. They explained that the Nice Treaty would amend previous treaties and allow more countries to join the European Union. This would occur without any threat to Irish neutrality. Groups opposed to the Treaty, including the Green Party, Sinn Féin, Socialist Party, Socialist Worker Party, Workers Solidarity Movement, and other Anarchist Groups, PANA (the Peace and Neutrality Alliance), and AFRI (Action From Ireland), agreed that the Nice Treaty is indeed about enlargement, as it hopes to increase the power of larger countries over smaller countries within the decision making process of the European Union. The European Union is currently made up of 15 member states: Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. Supporters of the Nice Treaty have claimed that several more countries are expected to join and that Nice allows enlargement to occur. This is only partly true and was used during public debate as a distraction from the real issues of enlargement.

It is true that Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia are all countries that are currently in accession negotiations with the EU. Turkey has also been given candidate status within these negotiations. However, the first difficulty with the enlargement argument arises with the conditions of the Amsterdam Treaty, ratified in 1998. The Amsterdam Treaty provided for the addition of five more Member States to the European Union.  In an interview with the Irish Times, the EU Commission president, Romano Prodi, stated: ‘Legally, ratification of the Nice Treaty is not necessary for enlargement. This does not mean that the Irish Referendum is not important. But, from this specific point-of-view, enlargement is possible without Nice.”

Technically, the European Union already has the legal framework to expand. It has had this ability since 1998, yet no country has joined since the Amsterdam Treaty. The Nice Treaty amends the Amsterdam Treaty by increasing the number of countries allowed to join the European Union, but most importantly, it amends the conditions under which the enlargement would take place. The Treaty primarily performs institutional changes within the EU, insuring that larger countries will maintain and gain power when new countries join. The first example of this occurs within the Council of Ministers. Presently, each member state is allocated a number of votes roughly based on the member state’s population. The Nice Treaty adjusts the present numbers and distributes more power upwards towards the larger countries. The table below illustrates this change.

Ireland and other smaller countries like it will lose power. The same change occurs within the European Parliament. Ireland currently has 15 of the 626 members of the European Parliament. After the Nice Treaty’s implementation, Ireland will lose 3 members, then having only 12 of 837 members of parliament.

The Nice Treaty will also change the operation of the European Commission. Under Nice, the European Council will be able to decide how many Commissioners there should be, when and if the EU reaches 27 member states. The Nice Treaty further states that there must be less than 27 Commissioners. Membership of the Commission would then rotate among member states. Therefore, smaller countries that hold their Commissioner crucial to fair representation within the EU, like Ireland, would lose their Commissioner for uncertain lengths of time.

The Nice Treaty prepares the European Union for a more hierarchal and undemocratic system of operation. The assertion that the Nice Treaty is designed primarily for the addition of member states to the European Union is incorrect. Statements on enlargement must be considered within the overall context of Europe, just as the claims of Irish neutrality should be examined with respect to certain developments.

Neutrality

The second major theme put forward in the debate leading up to the referendum was the issue of Irish military neutrality. Supporters of the Nice Treaty state that Irish neutrality remains genuine, since Ireland will not be part of any military alliance after Nice. This statement was an oversimplification, as critics of Nice were quickly able to cite history and the implications of Nice to show quite the opposite.

It is true that the Republic of Ireland has always claimed to be militarily neutral. This, however, is more in theory than practice. Throughout history, Irish policy has always favored the military program of the United States of America. Most recently, Shannon Airport has played a crucial role in this agenda. It was used as a stopover for the U.S. military during the Gulf War and the Irish government recently gave permission for the U.S. military to use Shannon Airport as a stopover en route to Afghanistan. This decision was put forward without consulting the Dáil or the Irish people. The Irish government also continues to remain silent regarding the recent targeting of Iraq.

It has become even more difficult for Ireland to claim neutrality as several areas in Ireland are used in the production of military components for the United States. Action From Ireland has reported extensively on the Irish involvement in the international arms trade. AFRI has listed more than a dozen companies located in Ireland that produce goods for arms manufacturers. Most of the companies produce “dual-use” technology, which they sell to arms manufacturers, but some of these companies produce “military goods,” which have no purpose other than to be used as part of weapons systems.

More recently, Raytheon, the third largest arms manufacturer in the U.S., maker of the Tomahawk and Patriot missile, announced that it is setting up a plant in County Derry. The Derry plant is said to be making hi-tech software, but it has recently been given an 800 million pound grant by the British Ministry of Defense. The irony of this little endeavor has us all scared.

Added to Ireland’s historical practices and current military manufacturing, the Nice Treaty aims to further establish the European Rapid Reaction Force. The RRF was first created by the Amsterdam Treaty and is the foundation of a European Army. It consists of land, sea, and air forces from EU member states. The RRF is made up of a 60,000 strong force (with 200,000 plus in reserve) and will allow Europe to place an army into a battle zone for up to one year. It is supposed to be capable of operating 4,000 kilometers away from continental Europe—in areas such as Africa and the Middle East. If this doesn’t sound enough like a NATO force, there’s more. One of the annexes of the Nice Treaty specifies that the NATO Secretary General should attend EU Ministerial meetings and there should be regular meetings between EU and NATO military committee and staffs.

Historically, Irish policy has favored the United States military project. The Irish government, without the approval of the Irish people, entered the Partnership for Peace, a NATO front organization. However, and this is very important, the Irish people have never before agreed to be officially part of a colonial power. The people of Ireland have seen, and continue to see, the violence and destruction inflicted by colonialism. The military project advanced by the Nice Treaty will irreversibly change Ireland’s historical stance on colonialism. Europe’s military philosophy behind the Treaty of Nice becomes even clearer when considered with regard to its economic strategy.

Neoliberal Agenda

A major issue left untouched by the national media in Ireland is the neoliberal economic policy advanced by the Nice Treaty. Ireland is no stranger to the push to privatize advanced by the EU. Aer Lingus, the state-owned airline, and ESB, the state-owned electric company, are facing pressure from the EU to privatize. The Nice Treaty aims to facilitate the process of privatization in Ireland and other member states.

European industry lobby groups campaigned to influence the negotiations on the Nice Treaty well before the closed meetings of December 11 took place. One of the main corporate demands was for further centralization of the EU’s decision-making on international trade, through changes in the EU Treaty’s Article 133. The Nice Treaty will expand the European Commission’s powers over WTO issues, by altering the voting procedures of the European Union. The goal of the Commission was to get full competence to negotiate on behalf of the EU and to introduce qualified majority voting on the important areas where unanimity is needed.

The Nice Treaty grants the EU the ability to quickly pass European policy, without having to be concerned with public discourse. By providing larger countries with more voting power, the introduction of qualified majority voting will be able to further suppress the opinions of smaller countries. In just one treaty, the EU has eliminated the need for unanimity in several areas of decision-making, and has allowed the larger countries to dominate these areas. Although the European Commission had also hoped to amend current investment and competition policies to make negotiations on investment agreement easier, the Nice Treaty signifies a great success for the European elite.

 It therefore comes as no surprise that the European elite was angered with Ireland’s rejection of the Nice Treaty. Since the public’s decision on Nice, the Irish government has scrambled to find a solution to appease Europe. But this has proven to be very difficult, as Europe will not change the Nice Treaty for Ireland. The Irish government was forced to find a way to offer the same referendum to the Irish people, while claiming that it was different to the first one. The result was predictable.

The Seville Declaration and Nice II

Supporters of the Nice Treaty, the sequel, are claiming that neutrality has now been secured with the government’s National Declaration at the Seville European Council on June 21, 2002. The Seville Declaration states that Ireland will continue its policy of military neutrality and that it will not be part of a European Army. It also maintains that Ireland will make a sovereign decision on whether Irish troops should participate in humanitarian crisis management tasks mounted by the EU, based on the “triple lock” of UN endorsement, Government decision, and Dáil approval. Lastly, the Seville Declaration states that Ireland will not adopt any future common defense policy or European treaty that may threaten Irish neutrality without the approval of the Irish people through a referendum.

As soon as these Declarations were made, many Irish people could immediately recognize the lies. The Declarations say there will be no EU army—but Ireland is already sending 850 troops, or 7.4 percent of its army, to join the Rapid Reaction Force. Seville also promises a referendum if there are further moves to a common defense force, but this has been said before. In 1997, the government promised a referendum before entering the Partnership for Peace and then broke its promise. Furthermore, the Declarations do nothing to affect the collaboration between NATO and the European Union.

The Seville Declarations are similar to the offers made to the Danish people in 1993. Danish voters rejected the Maastricht Treaty in 1992. They were then offered provisional opt outs on issues on defense and the single currency. The Seville Declarations offer much less to the Irish people, but the Irish government is entering its second Nice campaign with enormous effort to compensate. The government is producing “information pamphlets” on the Nice Treaty, which will be distributed to every household in the country at a cost of 1 million Euro to the Irish taxpayer. The Labour Party, the third largest party in Ireland, has now joined the government’s campaign. The government will also continue to receive the support of the same elite factions of Irish society that it did during the first referendum.

 Activists throughout Ireland will now face another powerful opposition for the second Nice Referendum in October. The smaller political parties and independent groups that fought the first referendum, and are back once again for this one. This second campaign has similar resources and will incorporate the same strategy of grassroots organizing.

The story from Ireland provides insight into the direction of Europe. That Ireland is the only country in Europe to hold a national referendum on such an important Treaty shows the EU’s distrust of public decision on European policy. There is no doubt that Europe plans to develop into a more militaristic and centralized world power and they will not accept dissent from their plans. This October, the Irish people have the chance to speak out against not only Nice, but also the current European project. Things could get interesting.

---

Sean Dunne lectures at the National College of Art & Design and is completing a PhD in sociology at Trinity College, Dublin.