Certain Ideas of Europe has a post wondering if the French would vote non to the European Constitution if they had to do it over again. I think that not only would the French vote non , but they would do it by a stronger majority this time. There are two reasons for this increase of French Euroscepticism. The first reason is that Sarkozy had legitimated Euroscepticism with his criticisms of the European Central Bank, of the strong Euro, and by insisting that Europe needs to become more protectionist and more about identity. Mitterrand and even Chirac to a lesser extent all used the idea of European integration to make the French dream that they would not only be able to compete with the United States, but that they would become a member of superpower again. Of course, the technocrats of Brussels have always been easy scapegoats for national problems, but it was rare to hear French presidents criticize the EU because they knew that it was their machin (object). Sarkozy understands that the EU no longer makes the French dream and that he is everything to dream by showing the French that he intends to make France great and prosper even if it means weakening the EU or rather forcing it to follow French interests.
The second reason is that by drafting a new treaty after the French voted No, the EU has shown that it is willing to move forward with European integration without taking on the important and unavoidable task of convincing Europeans of its necessity. It is that kind of paternalism, which had been with the EU since it was a small organization focused solely on coal that frustrates the French and other Europeans because they feel that EU considers European integration too great to be left in the hands of the people.
The problem in short is that because the idea of European integration was oversold to the French as the solution of all of France’s problems, the French today are blaming the EU for not delivering and especially favoring speed and economical interests over everything else. Finally, as the video below shows, French politicians and European politicians don’t know how to talk about Europe to the people. The reason for this ineloquence and this inarticulateness is the fact that they don’t have a vision for it, they simply feel the responsibility to continue something, which de Gaulle and Adenauer, Giscard d’Estaing and Schmidt, and Mitterrand and Kohl dreamed of, and felt in their gut and their heart was necessary to avoid other bloody and divisive conflicts. In other words, the trouble is that very few European politicians are able to talk about Europe, the way Sarkozy talks about America.
Comments