Ireland and UK both face profound debate on future in EU

In the confusion that has followed rejection of the Nice Treaty there has not been much public discussion of its implications for Ireland's participation in the euro. It is all too easy to say the two are not related, but that is to miss the point of what swimming in the mainstream of European integration has been all about for this State.

Ireland's consideration of whether to revisit the Nice result also coincides over the next year with the crucial phase of decision-making on whether the Blair government will hold a referendum on the euro. That gives the outcome of both issues a strategic importance in British-Irish relations. The Taoiseach, Mr Ahern, said at the EU summit in Gothenburg that there is only one way to be involved in the EU - "fully".

His remark should be put alongside points made this week in Dublin by the Belgian Minister of State for Foreign Affairs, Ms Annemie NeytsUyttebroeck. She said there would be a "huge crisis" if Ireland did not ratify the Nice Treaty (presumably in a second referendum after securing modifications in its text or clarifications of its effects on this State).

She regards the treaty as a political imperative to enable enlargement take place. Its rejection by one state would imply that the 15 EU member-states "no longer support the political, cultural and psychological reunification of Europe" - a "terrible" message to send populations in the candidate-states, whose patience is anyway running out because of the long delays involved. It would dramatically alter Ireland's developing relations with central and eastern European states.

In that light, she said, it would be necessary before Ireland votes a second time on the treaty to spell out a much more fundamental question for voters, especially if they seemed likely to maintain their opposition: "Whether you want to stay or get out. Ultimately you might find out that this is what it is about, and that of course, is way beyond the scope of this treaty".

This was in keeping with her belief that opponents of the treaty, and the political process it opens up, must be confronted head on rather than assuming they are naive or ill-informed.

Her observations carry weight, since Belgium assumes the EU presidency tomorrow for six months. It will guide the emerging quasi-constitutional debate on the EU's future as well as respond to whatever clarifications the Government seeks to address the concerns of those who voted No or abstained on Nice.

These issues will dominate the Forum on Europe from the autumn. It remains to be seen whether they figure prominently in the forthcoming election campaign. There is outright resistance to holding another Nice referendum on the same day, because of the assumed boost it would give to Sinn Fein, the Greens and other opponents of the treaty. But if such profound existential questions are indeed posed by the Nice crisis it would be quite irresponsible of the Government not to present them at a time when voters are most aware of political issues.

At his concluding press conference in Gothenburg Mr Ahern accepted some blame for not "making a big thing" of such issues. He said that as a result of the Nice vote "multinationals wonder where is Ireland's future in Europe". He spelled out the connection between foreign investment here and Irish investment in the candidate-states, such as Poland, and Ireland's full participation in the EU. Ireland's annual £65 billion foreign trade depends centrally on it, he said.

More will be heard on this theme of connectedness. It needs to be directed especially at the extraordinarily high 666,976 people who voted Yes to the Amsterdam Treaty and abstained on Nice.

Many of them may assume Ireland's commitment to European integration over the last generation is a scaffolding they can afford to cast off now that we have reached average EU income (but not welfare or infrastructural) levels - akin to the transition from adolescence to young adulthood. They fail to see that integration is instead foundational. Unless subsequent debates on Ireland's optimum position and interests are conducted with that fully in mind the grave choices facing voters on Nice will not be properly understood.

The Celtic Tiger would probably not survive another No to Nice. That is a harsh political and economic reality which will involve a difficult choice between two undesirable options for a minority of committed voters. For the larger group of indifferent abstainers it is all the more important that they are made aware of it.

Such blithe insouciance is unlikely to survive the introduction of the euro as an everyday currency from January 1st. Ireland chose to swim in the mainstream of that policy, by joining the euro in spite of the UK's opt-out, in an expression of differentiation that drew on their respective nationalisms. All the more ironic to hear Ms NeytsUyttebroeck group Ireland together with the UK, Sweden and Denmark in her discussion of the EU as a new sovereignty, additional to the national one (although she thought Irish people have a much stronger sense of European identity).

That positioning, or one outside it again along with Norway and Switzerland, is perhaps the logical result of another rejection of Nice. This would contradict so much of Ireland's recent experience that to confirm it would represent a radical change in direction of which most voters are unaware.

In Britain there has been speculation that Mr Tony Blair has been out-manoeuvred by Mr Gordon Brown in his objective of having a referendum soon on whether to join the euro. That is probably over-stating their strategic differences; it seems clear they both agree on its desirability. They differ on short-term timing and longer-term personal ambition, since Mr Brown craves the top job. But on the well-based assumption that Mr Blair is determined to join it would seem rational for Mr Brown to support him if he wants to succeed as prime minister.

UK voters' opposition to the euro is wide but shallow and capable of being turned around by determined political leadership. Unless advocacy begins in the autumn it will be very difficult to hold and win a referendum before mid-term blues take hold concerning Labour's delivery on its domestic programme.

One way or another the UK and Ireland will be conducting existential debates on their relationships with Europe in the next couple of years. How they are resolved will determine the British-Irish relationship as well as their respective relations with Europe.