As part of our EU at the crossroads project we are running a series of blog posts and podcasts on the British EU debate. The latest in this series is a blog post by Petros Fassoulas, Chairman of the European Movement UK.
The closer europhobes think Britain is getting to an EU exit the bigger the body of evidence and the number of people advising against it becomes. You cannot blame them for feeling the ground disappearing under their feet. For far too long they claimed that the belief that Britain must remain firmly committed to its membership of the EU was limited among eurofanatics/eurofederalists/traitors (delete as appropriate).
But the debate is shifting rapidly and Europhobes are running out of arguments fast. Central to their discourse has been the argument that membership of the EU harms British business. But all of the sudden business is stepping forward en mass to argue that Britain’s future and commercial interests lay within the European Union.
Lord Carr, the President of the CBI, recently said “Europe is the bedrock of our international trade. It should be viewed as the launch-pad from which our global trade can expand not the landmass from which we retreat. And if we are to avoid an exit vote in any referendum it is essential that the voice of British business is loud and clear in extolling the virtues of future engagement not as a reluctant participant but as the lynchpin of our wider global trade ambitions.
He is not the only one feeling that way. Richard Branson expressed a similar sentiment in his new year’s blog. He said “The UK must not become a peripheral country on the edge of Europe. This will be damaging to long-term prospects of British business and also in the country's ability to attract new international companies to set up and employ people in the country.”
Even the financial services industry, through TheCityUK, the City’s lobby group, has also been making some powerful pro-membership statements. Their Chairman said in a speech late last year “It is really poppycock to believe that the City can survive in its present form if it is not an integral part of the European financial services framework.” He added, “We know that London benefits from attracting firms that want easy access to the Single Market. Those firms arrive here and create jobs across the UK as their operations develop.”
They all came together and were joined by many other to sign a letter to the Financial Times arguing in favour of continuing and complete membership of the EU and against attempts to re-negotiate a minimalistic, and as a result ineffectual, relationship with our European partners.
But that is not the only shift under the ground of Europhobes’ thesis against EU membership. They have been arguing that Britain does not need the EU because it has the “special relationship” to fall back to. But it looks like that the special relationship will not be that “special” if Britain was to leave the EU. Before Christmas it was leaked by the White House that, in a conversation with David Cameron, US President Barack Obama raised the issue of Britain’s membership of the EU. It was reported that the White House is baffled by notions entertained by some Europhobes that the “special relationship” would be strengthened if Britain was to leave the EU.
Their argument being that Britain has more gravitas, and as a result is a more valuable ally to the US, as a full member of the EU. Such statements were coupled by a rare public intervention from a senior US official. Philip Gordon, the US assistant secretary for European affairs in the State Department, said while on a trip to London, "We have a growing relationship with the EU as an institution, which has an increasing voice in the world, and we want to see a strong British voice in that EU. That is in America's interests. We welcome an outward-looking EU with Britain in it." An unambiguous indication of US beliefs that Britain is of little use to them as a small island adrift in the middle of the Atlantic.
These voices from the business community and across Atlantic are coming to join Britain’s European partners who for a while now have been advising against tendencies of isolationism and nebulous concepts of renegotiating the UK’s membership of the EU. Ireland, one of Britain’s closest allies, recently took over the Presidency of the EU Council and its Prime Minister, Mr Enda Kenny, was quick to stress that he does not expect the re-opening of EU Treaties just to suit a certain Member State. He was joined by his Deputy Prime Minister who argued that “27 or 28 different categories of membership won’t work” and that terms of membership have to be the same for all EU member states.
They are not the only ones who think so. Mr Radek Sikorski, the Foreign Minister of Poland, one of the most successful EU Member States and a long standing UK ally, highlighted the benefits of EU membership and warned in a speech delivered in Oxford that the UK should not expect to be successful if it tried to negotiate a special kind of EU membership for itself. He went even further to outline that the UK would lose massively if it was to leave the EU altogether. Wolfgang Schaeuble, Germany’s influential Finance Minister, was even more explicit in his warning. He said that even though he wanted Britain to remain in the EU, it should not think that it will be able to blackmail its partners in an effort to change EU Treaties and abandon its membership commitments. So Europhobes are finding themselves deprived of one more argument, that we can take advantage of the process of EU reform by threatening our way towards a new settlement, one where Britain can reap all the benefits of EU membership but opt-out of all its responsibilities. An ill-advised and clearly not available strategy.
Faced with the resurgence of EU membership support among the mainstream of the political and business world Europhobes cling on to the one thing they think they have left. They quote opinion polls that seem to show that a majority of the British people would like the UK to leave the EU. Not surprisingly, after decades of anti-EU bias in the political discourse and across the tabloid press, the British people have only had the opportunity to listen the euromyth-infused anti-EU arguments. As a result their attitude towards EU membership is one-dimensional. But with more and more voices speaking out and explaining the benefits of EU membership and the dangers of an EU exit, public opinion will finally be objectively informed about what it really means to be a member of the EU.
The tide is shifting and with it will public attitudes towards the EU. There is a silent majority in Britain, eurosceptic because it never heard the other side of the argument, who is keen to finally listen to and be part of an honest, fact-based, holistic conversation on Britain’s membership of the EU. The facts are on the side of the pro-membership camp and so is business, trade unions, academia and Britain’s European and global partners. It is about time Europhobes listen to everyone’s advice and accept that a strong, confident Britain belongs in and stands to benefit from a strong, confident EU.
11th January 2013 at 06:01pm
We in Britain have phrase for this kind of wishful thinking:
“Whistling in the wind”
11th January 2013 at 07:01pm
I do not disagree with the suggestion that those who favour withdrawal may be disappointed but the article omits the main reason for the increase in eurosceptism in the UK. It is the problems in the eurozone which have changed opinion. The credibility of those who argued for the UK adopting the euro has been destroyed.
The battle to keep the UK in the EU can only be won by “eurosceptics” who argued against the euro. The best thing the federalists can do is say nothing.
26th January 2013 at 10:01pm
“Not surprisingly, after decades of anti-EU bias in the political discourse and across the tabloid press, the British people have only had the opportunity to listen the euromyth-infused anti-EU arguments. As a result their attitude towards EU membership is one-dimensional.”
Thumbs up! I couldn’t write it any better!
I just could recommend everyone to read newspapers of other countries to get a more objective picture. The English press is but a big gag!
26th April 2013 at 04:04pm
I really do not disagree with the suggestion on this article.
26th April 2013 at 05:04pm
it seems to be making a mess in the Eu.
14th July 2013 at 10:07pm
Britain’s special relationship with the US is in “jeopardy” over President Obama’s refusal to wholeheartedly endorse the right of Falkland Islanders to determine their own destiny, a senior US Congressman has warned.
9th September 2013 at 09:09pm
The author of this piece clearly knows nothing of the UK or its people and will, like a good many others, receive one hell of a shock when the British public votes to leave the EU.
I can’t list all the errors in this article, there’s just too many but here’s big ones:
1) The claim that eurosceptics have ever been able to argue their case without opposition can only be made by someone ignorant of the existence of the Guardian, Financial Times, Independent and BBC—all of which are pro-EU
2) British business is of two minds about membership in the EU. Selectively quoting individuals such as Richard Branson is evidence of nothing. Some businesses are pro, some anti-, some don’t give a damn. The TCUK has long been pro-EU and has long been seen only to represent a segment of British business.
3) This issue is not one of economics, but national sovereignty. Therefore, the opinions of foreigners and failed politicians like Barack Obama, Sikorski and Schauble are irrelevant. This is a decision for the British people. And we want out.
4) Bonus: the Irish have never in their entire existence been our closest allies.
Your message will be submitted to a moderator before appearing online. Name and email address are required, all other fields are optional. Your email will not be displayed.
Towards a new EU foreign policy
Why Europe needs a new Asia strategy
How sectarian agendas shape the politics of the Middle East
What are China's interests in the Middle East?
How to rebuild the Palestinian national movement
Germany will not provide clear leadership for Europe
More intergovernmentalism, more differentiation
How regional actors shape the conflict in Syria
The politics of China's most powerful man
What Europe needs to do
Why the German model is not a blueprint for Europe