Rising from the ruins of two world wars and the threat of
Soviet expansion, European political and economic unity not only turned
historic mortal enemies into allies and friends but safeguarded peace and
freedom for its citizen. It brought unprecedented, broadly based prosperity and
economic security. It healed ancient religious, ethnic and ideological rifts on
the bellicose continent, alleviated poverty in individual member states and
helped peripheral nations get closer to the EU core in terms of income levels
and economic development. Since the collapse of the Berlin Wall it has been
instrumental in reuniting the East with the West and bringing democracy to
former communist nations.
The EU still plays this role. This is why responsible
politicians in former Yugoslav republics are applying to get in: they know that
becoming part of United Europe will allow them to live in peace with each other
and improve the economic plight of their citizens. True, it may not happen
soon, but it is a more promising course than the alternatives.
There is no question that Ukraine needs the EU, as well. Europe
is perhaps its only chance to defend its nationhood from infringement by
Russia. It is a way to build a modern economy – and a strong professional
military. It is also how Ukraine will protect the legacy of the Maidan and
ultimately defeat corruption and oligarchic rule.
All this is self-evident, but nowadays self-evident truths are
being challenged by radicals and require restating.
Does the EU have problems? Of course it does. Only communism
claimed to solve all of the world’s problems and establish heaven on earth –
with disastrous results. All other human projects are flawed – to a greater or
lesser extent.
Over the past eight years, the EU has been stumbling from one
crisis to the next. The global financial downturn was followed by the euro-zone
debt debacle and now, as the continent remains mired in economic stagnation, it
has been hit by a wave of refugees.
Note that only the debt crisis was the result of flaws in the
structure of the EU. The other two crises would have occurred regardless of
what Brussels had done and would have been far more severe.
Nevertheless, those difficulties have emboldened the opponents
of the European Project – largely those on the right, among the radical
nationalist fringe. Their appeal has unquestionably broadened. All of a sudden,
seven decades after what seemed like a definitive defeat of Hitler, his
latter-day followers are once more on the ascendancy and are attacking the
pan-European institution whose ultimate purpose was to make sure nationalist
wars do not return to the continent.
The rise of nationalism – and even outright fascism – in
Eastern and Central Europe is in some ways understandable. Democracy is a
recent transplant to those shores, and their population has gone through
disorienting dislocations over the past quarter century. They had exaggerated
expectations for what freedom from Soviet domination would bring and are now
disappointed in the result.
The governments in Hungary and Poland – and even in Finland –
want to weaken European unity, and anti-European nationalists are gaining
support also in richer, older members. The United States, as the current
Presidential campaign is revealing, has its own reservoirs of right-wing
xenophobia. It may no longer be a champion of peace and stability in Europe.
In this environment it behooves mainstream parties in the core
nations to band together to safeguard European unity – because even in
countries that voted in anti-European nationalists, there is a strong and
broadly based consensus in favor of the EU. The current string of problems is
likely to be temporary – unless individual European countries decide to follow
the example of the 1930s and try to go it alone.
In this respect it is tragic to watch the Tory government in
the UK as it works to undermine the EU. Starting to revamp EU rules in the name
of narrowly defined national interests, as UK Prime Minister David Cameron has
done, is likely to open a can of worms in the near future and lead to further
weakening of pan-European ties – in the name of national interests of a bunch
of other countries.
Remarkably, Britain’s eurosceptics seem to have lost sight of
how their country, which had been hit severely by the devastation of the war
and the loss of its empire, has reinvented itself since joining the EU in 1973,
how it has prospered as a financial center and how London has become a magnet
for young people across Europe and beyond.
Having twisted arms in Brussels, Cameron now wants Britain to
stay in the EU. But he’s taking a huge risk holding a referendum. Much could
happen between now and June – a worsening of the refugee crisis, another terror
attack on the continent or in the UK, etc. The world economy is starting to
weaken, too, and might by then slip into recession.
Besides, the eurosceptics have an enticing tale to tell. A
typical bill of goods being sold to voters by the advocates of Brexit is that
the Brits will continue to enjoy French wines, Italian Parmesan and German cars
the way they’re doing now – except they won’t be tied down to the EU
politically.
There are plenty of scenarios under which the voters might heed
their siren call.
Of course in the short run Britain will go on enjoying those
European imports even if it waves goodbye to Brussels. But it’ll gradually have
less of them. There might even be fewer Brits, too, if Scotland decides to stay
in the EU.
In the long run, moreover, Brexit might easily mark the
beginning of an end of European unity. And in a disunited Europe the
unthinkable might happen once again.
Come to think of it, it isn’t even unthinkable any longer. There
is a war going on in Europe already, and for the first time since World War II
it involves a major power. That power, Russia, is once again expansionist, and,
much like Germany in the 1930s, it is itching to avenge a defeat and perceived
national slights. It is also ruled by an authoritarian strongmen and his
coterie of thugs. This time it’s Ukraine, not Czechoslovakia or Poland, that
has become the first victim.
Putin hates the EU. He has provided support to a variety of
right-wingers, from Hungary’s Viktor Orban to France’s Marie Le Pen. He might
realize that his resources might be more effectively deployed by taking up the
eurosceptic cause in Britain.
Meanwhile, for the Tories to act so irresponsibly at such a
time means nothing less than betraying the two generations of Britain’s young
men mowed down on the continent in two bloody world wars.
