Strong moral case for enlargement

Nice is about enlargement, asserts Brigid Laffan , and Irish voters face a moral choice: we can facilitate the final act of healing…

Nice is about enlargement, asserts Brigid Laffan, and Irish voters face a moral choice: we can facilitate the final act of healing a divided Europe - or we can turn our backs.

In August 1989, the Hungarian government ended the Cold War and Soviet hegemony in Central Europe by removing the barbed wire from its Western border. Europe was transformed. The enlargement of the European Union to embrace the former communist states was inevitable. The timing and conditions of accession were all that had to be decided.

On Saturday, October 19th, the Irish electorate will have a major say on when and how the candidate countries join. Notwithstanding the gap of 13 years, the fall of the Berlin Wall and the Irish referendum are intrinsically linked. At a meeting in Warsaw on September 25th, the 10 candidate countries issued a declaration in which they emphasised "that the ratification of the Treaty of Nice by all of the member states is one of the elements of EU internal preparations for the admission of new member states which will enable all of us to meet in the Union in 2004".

This was a direct appeal from these countries to the Irish electorate. In the Warsaw Declaration, they are telling us that the Irish vote matters to their future. This was brought home to me in a very personal way when I listened to Adam Michnik, a former dissident and Polish Solidarity leader, speak in Dublin on Friday, October 5th. Speaking in Polish, Adam Michnik ended his address on "What is Europe" by asking the Irish to vote Yes. Michnik has enormous moral authority given his pivotal role in the Polish struggle.

READ MORE

For those who argue that Nice is not about enlargement, it is instructive to recall the preamble of the Nice Treaty. The 15 EU heads of state, including the President of Ireland:

recall the historic importance of ending the division of the European continent;

desire to complete the process started by the Treaty of Amsterdam of preparing the institutions of the European Union to function in an enlarged Union; and

are determined, on this basis, to press ahead with the accession negotiations in order to bring them to a successful conclusion.

The historic importance and political intent of the Nice Treaty could not be more explicit. As voters, we face a choice not just about institutions and Ireland's relations with Europe but a moral choice about healing the artificial division of the continent. We can remove the last brick of the Berlin Wall. Fourteen of the 15 member states have approved the Nice Treaty. A Yes vote is the only way that the enlargement negotiations can be brought to a conclusion without a crisis, and on time. None of the groups advocating a No vote have specified how enlargement can proceed smoothly if Ireland fails to ratify Nice. The 10 candidate countries deserve better.

If this powerful moral argument is insufficient, there is of course the question of Irish interests. EU membership was central to Ireland's economic and social development over the last 30 years and will be an important part of our future well-being.

As a small open economy, Ireland is crucially dependent on its relations with Europe and the wider world. Small states foster their interests and values by effectively using multilateral organisations. The EU is a good framework for small states as it gives them a high level of representation and voice relative to their population. weight. A system based on treaties, law and institutions offers small states a predictable and safe environment for dealing with the world.

The 30 years of Ireland's engagement with the EU underline just how good this system is for small states. There is nothing in the Nice Treaty that damages Ireland's core interests and values. In Nice, the large states lose their second Commissioner and the future appointment of the Commission is based on strict equality. In relation to weighted voting, the balance between large and small states has been broadly maintained. When all 27 states join, the large states, with 70 per cent of the population, will have 49 per cent of the votes, whereas the small states, with only 30 per cent of the population, will have 51 per vent of the votes.

THIS is a significant representation of small states, underlined by the fact that Germany, with 20 times Ireland's population, has only four times our voting power. Concerning the increase in qualified majority voting, Ireland was only outvoted in seven votes out of a total of 205 in the five years to 2001.

Those on the No side continue with their misrepresentation of the provisions on enhanced co-operation in the Nice Treaty. They claim that these provisions are designed by the large states to damage the interests of the small and that they will result in a two-tier Europe. They fail to read the rather direct language in Article 43 which specifies that measures under enhanced co-operation "are open to all member states". This provision cannot be interpreted as one designed to create a two-tier Europe.

Small states must be smart in the contemporary international system. Ireland has been a smart state in the EU by being a constructive player broadly supportive of the development of the EU. Success in EU negotiations is built on good arguments, good negotiators and goodwill. Ireland will undoubtedly lose goodwill among existing member states and candidate states in the event of a No vote. This will have a direct impact on Ireland's standing in the world.

Brigid Laffan is chairwoman of the Irish Alliance for Europe