The May 29 referendum in France is about far more than the EU constitution
As we have discussed, the two reasons most cited for a likely French “non” vote on the European constitution are (a) free movement of services and service providers across European borders; and (b) Turkey’s future entry into the EU. It has been pointed out that the constitution has nothing to do with these issues — the Bolkestein Directive on liberalizing services policies was enacted in 2004, and Turkey’s possible admission into the EU would occur in about a decade. That’s one of the things that makes a possible French rejection so troubling to supporters of the Euro-constitution: the issues in France have far more to do with the very structure and mission of the EU — indeed hearkening back to the idea of the Common Market itself — than with a certain 511 page document.
To many Frenchmen, the idea of further encroachment of the lower wages and higher productivity from the ten countries (74 million people) admitted last year is apparently unacceptable. Our view is that they want to put the brakes on the entire European project before it goes one step further. Take a look at the ghastly unemployment situation in France today (via the Economist):
Unemployment is 10.1% in France, and 22% for people under 25. This is a disaster — unemployment among the young at levels of the Great Depression (albeit with an abundant dole). Indeed, the US unemployment rate has not been over ten percent for a year since 1940 (though it came close in 1982/83).
Right now, the effort in Europe appears to consist of scaremongering to get the French to vote yes. If France votes no, various pundits say, there will be a period of stagnation in Europe, a loss of Europe’s ability “to play a role in the world,” or interest rate hikes and an end to the Euro. It is interesting to us that Europe is without a contitution today; we ask the scaremongers: is the Continent stagnating, is Europe’s role in the political and diplomatic world limited, and are Europe’s monetary policies currently in trouble.
If the answers are yes, and we believe they are, a new document and a new layer of bureaucracy are not the solutions.