Training | 2009.10.09
The Tories' Eurosceptic toxicity could leave Britain stranded | Martin Kettle
Clearly, Cameron should mould himself on Merkel. But he is a prisoner of his own views and of an ideologically phobic party
British voters have often shaped the politics of Ireland. An equivalent impact in the opposite direction is rarer. On Friday, though, Irish voters will leave a lasting mark in British politics. The second Irish referendum on the Lisbon treaty will define the immediate future not just of Ireland and the EU but of British politics for years to come.
The referendum will do this because it will set in train a series of events and choices that will do much to settle what kind of national leader David Cameron intends to be. It is no exaggeration to say that Cameron\'s assiduously cultivated and hard-won credibility as a pragmatic one-nation centrist, as a liberal Tory and as a Tory progressive – hugely important assets that are at the heart of his march towards No 10 – will all hinge on how he responds to how Ireland votes.
If the real Irish opinion polls can be relied on, as distinct from the fraudulent ones confected by Europhobes to help the flagging No campaign, the Irish are poised to vote yes to Lisbon. If they vote no, Lisbon is dead and buried. If they vote yes, the Irish will have scuppered one of the last viable hopes of British Europhobes that someone, somewhere, will sink the treaty. If the Irish vote yes, the treaty, which replaces the defeated constitution and strengthens some of the EU\'s institutions, will stand on the threshold of becoming international law.
So here is the choice for Cameron ahead of Conservative conference week. Does he respond to an Irish yes by actively urging the remaining European non-signers – Poland and the Czech Republic – to hold out until the general election? To do so would allow a Tory government to call a quick referendum on Lisbon next summer which, with the guarantee of full-throated assistance from Cameron\'s new best friend Rupert Murdoch, would surely kill the treaty. Or, on the other hand, does he treat the issue pragmatically and accept that, if the hold-outs fall into line before the British election, the treaty will be a fact of life? His responses this weekend will matter. The signs are not good.
Tory Europhobes are hugely excited over the possibility that either the Poles or the Czechs can be persuaded not to sign. Most of their efforts are focused on the Thatcherite Czech president Vaclav Klaus, who is refusing to put his name to the treaty (which has been passed by the Czech parliament) until the last of a series of legal challenges from local opponents of the treaty – all so far rejected by the Czech courts – have been heard. Last month, Cameron himself sent a handwritten letter of anti-treaty solidarity to Klaus. Accounts differ as to whether the Tory leader urged Klaus not to sign or whether it merely praised him for his resistance.
Cameron should be compelled to publish that letter. Its terms are every bit as important to political accountability as MPs\' expenses details. Yet whether he publishes or not will do little to diminish the damage that such moves are already doing to a much more important relationship for our probable next prime minister – the one with the re-elected German chancellor Angela Merkel.
Germany is Europe\'s most important country, and Merkel is Europe\'s most important politician. It and she ought to be key allies for Cameron, especially now Merkel is heading a more conservative coalition. Yet Cameron seems willing to squander that possibility in order to appease his anti-Europeans. It is madness.
Merkel is already furious with Cameron for allowing the Tories to withdraw from the centre-right EPP grouping in the European parliament. She cannot understand why he has been willing to make common cause with some of eastern Europe\'s nastiest parties in countries she knows much better. Now Cameron is at risk of compounding this offence by actively intervening to frustrate a project, the Lisbon treaty, which is at the heart of German thinking about Europe. Behind all this lurks something even more damaging to British interests: the Conservative party\'s continued pledge to "not let matters rest", even if Lisbon is finally ratified.
This is very serious stuff. It certainly worries thoughtful British business opinion. British political opinion should also be far more concerned about where it is leading. Distasteful though it is, Cameron\'s readiness to get into bed with central European rightwing nationalists is less important than the wider damage he is doing to Britain\'s position in Europe. Cameron\'s decisions are pushing Merkel into the arms of other nations with less sensible agendas. The Times reported yesterday that Nicolas Sarkozy is attempting to revive the disastrous Franco-German axis at the heart of the EU. Meanwhile in Washington, the Obama administration looks on aghast as Cameron insouciantly sets about burning international bridges.
A few months ago, I asked a member of the shadow cabinet how he would describe the differences, if any, between Cameron and George Osborne. If Cameron was a mainland European politician, the shadow minister responded, he would be a leftwing Christian Democrat (as Merkel is). Osborne is much more of a market-friendly Free Democrat (the party with which Merkel is now to form a coalition). Osborne tends to think the state should not get involved in things which Cameron accepts it should.
In a hypothetical conflict between a village and a developer, Cameron would tend to side with the village and Osborne with the developer. While Cameron lacks the pessimism of a one-nation Tory like Douglas Hurd , he also falls short of the one-nation optimism of a Chris Patten . Yet he is the authentic one-nation article all the same.
That reply pinpoints Cameron\'s attractions to moderate, centre-ground opinion, as well as defining why Osborne is less of an asset. But it implicitly poses the question: if Cameron is a Christian Democrat, why can\'t he behave like one? If only he would decide to be the British Merkel. Britain would be in safe hands at home and abroad if he did – or even if he merely decided to take a pragmatic approach to UK interests in Europe. But that is not, yet, what Cameron is offering. He is a prisoner of his own views and of an ideologically phobic party.
It is as plain as anything in politics can be that Merkel should be Cameron\'s model. Yet Euroscepticism has created a gulf that threatens to leave Britain stranded on the wrong side of every important global alliance and initiative, reducing us to a less significant player even than Berlusconi\'s Italy. This is the unavoidable reason why no pro-European can yet afford to embrace the Cameron project. As Ireland votes, Cameron is about to be weighed in the balance too.
For more information, please visit
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/[...]d-cameron-lisbon-treaty-europe
