Wall Street Journal
December 12, 2011
The decision by David Cameron to veto a European treaty change has sent shockwaves through the European Union. At home, the U.K. prime minister has been hailed in some quarters as a political genius who has stood up to European bullies, delivering a Thatcherite handbagging to Franco-German efforts to destroy the City of London. To others, Mr. Cameron is guilty of a colossal diplomatic blunder, alienating his country's closest trading partners with a crude attempt to blackmail them in the midst of a grave crisis that presents an equally serious danger to the U.K. Outside the U.K., his actions have provoked anger and bafflement that anyone could have risked so much for no apparent gain for his country.
Adding to the confusion, Mr. Cameron's own explanation for his decision is far from convincing. There was nothing in the proposed treaty changes that would have affected the U.K. in any material way since they largely comprised new fiscal rules that would only apply to the euro zone. Nor did Mr. Cameron protect a vital national industry: His shopping list of demands for safeguards for the City of London was rejected out of hand, leaving London no better off; indeed, the U.K.'s ability to defend the City in Brussels may have been severely weakened.
It is hard to avoid the conclusion that Mr. Cameron, unwilling to face down his own backbenchers' demands for a referendum on Britain's membership of the European Union, put his personal political position ahead of the national interest.
More
No comments:
Post a Comment