You are probably fed up with all the fuss about the Lisbon Treaty. That is why I will try to cut this letter to the bone and discuss only the most interesting points of the debate on the subject that took place two weeks ago between Francisco Sexias da Costa, current Portuguese Ambassador in France, and Jean-Jacques Fritz, Director of the Strasbourg Office of the European Parliament.
One of the main problems with the EU appears to be the ratification process of treaties. Since the Maastricht Treaty (or, the Treaty on the European Union), it has been more and more difficult for each subsequent EU treaty to come into force. This may simply be a natural consequence of the growing number of EU members (obviously, 27 states cannot take decisions as smoothly as six or 15 would). But the Lisbon Treaty has exceeded all reasonable expectations of establishing a treaty under an enlarged EU - the struggle for the introduction of the Lisbon Treaty began in 2005 and is just coming to a close now.
Considering the time spent on negotiations and attempts to ratify the infamous Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe and the Lisbon Treaty, the question is how long it will take the members of the potentially even bigger EU – after one or two further enlargements – to introduce another treaty in the future?
On top of this, it has become clear that the ratification of the new treaty is an opportunity for some of the EU states to play a peculiar form of trick or treat. The game started when Denmark – as the only member state – rejected the Maastricht Treaty in the referendum in 1992 and was promptly given four opt-outs (the so-called Edinburgh Agreement) in order to complete the ratification process. The next one was Ireland and the financial aid it was promised by the EU in return for a long-awaited ‘yes’ in the second referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. Quite recently, we saw the Czech President trying to follow in the Danish and Irish footsteps so as to win something more for the ratification.
If this tendency becomes a norm, the whole process of European integration is open to doubt. The growing number of opt-outs indicates another challenge for the EU: the parity of big and small members. How should the right for a just representation of all member states be reconciled with the process of integration? When the French rejected the Constitutional Treaty, it was dead. When the Irish said ‘no’ to the Lisbon Treaty, it was pursued anyway.
Should one large member state be allowed to put a spanner in the works of other countries aiming for further integration? Will the EU be stronger with the new Treaty? Theoretically, it can, but practically, nobody is sure of it.
Jean-Jacques Fritz said that, in automobile terms, the Lisbon Treaty is the equivalent of a Mercedes. It might well be true, but the problem is that even the best car is useless if it is driven by a poor driver on a bad road.
Related posts:
