'Europe Demands More from Its Voters'

DER SPIEGEL

European politicians are to blame! No, the Irish are to blame! Wrong again, it's the disillusioned Europeans! Everyone thinks they know why the Irish rejected the Lisbon Treaty last Thursday. German commentators give it a go as well.

Ireland put the brakes on EU integration on Thursday.

The shock delivered by the Irish last Thursday is difficult to overstate. By a margin of 53.4 percent to 46.6 percent, Ireland's voters rejected the Lisbon Treaty, an agreement designed to improve the efficiency of the European Union. In other words, as many observers have pointed out, a tiny minority of European citizens have blocked a reform project designed to benefit 490 million EU citizens.

But what does the Irish veto mean? Should the EU move forward with a core group willing to further integrate? Should Ireland be asked to hold a new referendum? Should the ratification process be carried forward as though nothing happened?

The ideas are myriad. But on Monday, most commentators in Germany seem to be at a loss as to what should be made of the debacle:

Writing for Die Zeit on Monday, former German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer writes:

"Poor Europe. With the Irish referendum, it has thrown itself needlessly into a political calamity. Of course the EU will continue to exist and its institutions will continue to function, for better or worse, on the foundation of the Treaty of Nice. But a proactive, strong Europe capable of determining its own fate will not be in the cards for quite some time."

"What will be the consequences of the Irish referendum? First of all, a strong European foreign policy -- which, given the current state of the world, is more necessary than ever before -- was buried on June 12. Nation-states will have the foreign policy say once again. The same is true for the democratization of the EU…. The Irish decision is, given this point, especially grotesque, because it rejected exactly that which it demands."

"Secondly, the EU will stagnate. In addition, the process of enlargement will either be delayed or will be stopped completely…."

"Thirdly, the smaller and mid-sized members of the EU will pay the price for the Irish decision when foreign policy becomes re-nationalized. They will lose influence. That is nothing new if one only looks at the foreign policies of France and Great Britain. But the case of Germany is different. Germany has long seen its strategic interests from within the framework of an integrated EU. A long-term blockade of a strong EU will necessarily change this viewpoint."

The center-left Süddeutsche Zeitung on Monday reminds its readers of Europe's long history of violence and the role the EU has played in interrupting that cycle. It writes:

"It is easy to berate European politicians because they were unable to explain a treaty or because they were unable to awaken enthusiasm for their work. But perhaps one should be allowed to berate European citizens for once for not showing an interest in the complex political entity that has grown up around them. People would of course like things to be simpler and like to believe populists who say things could be simpler. But this treaty -- highly complicated and a masterwork of political skill -- … is not so simple. It introduces more democracy, more involvement and more control. The Lisbon Treaty is a treaty that forces the politicians in Brussels back to their voters. But it also demands more from those voters."

"Europe cannot allow itself to be slowed down by 862,415 Irish. The Irish government should study the treaty and follow its voters' wishes with a period of EU abstinence. But Europe hasn’t come even close to the end of its history."

The financial daily Handelsblatt writes:

"Europe is on the knife's edge. Can the EU keep together despite the failed referendum in Ireland? Or will it drift apart into groups of those that want to integrate further and those that don't? With earlier crises, that was something of an academic question. This time, though, it is real. Because this time, the EU doesn't have the strength to hammer out a new treaty as it did after the French and Dutch vetoed the European constitution in 2005. Either Europe finds a way to get Ireland to change its mind, or we are seeing the EU collapse into a meaningless framework with a small core of tightly bound countries surrounded by a loose alliance of others."

The weekly Die Zeit, which comes out on Thursday, wrote in an online editorial this weekend:

"The extreme absurdity of using a referendum to decide on such a complex entity as the European Union has become abundantly clear. The minority of one country -- in the Irish example, just 45 percent of registered voters cast their ballots -- can vote on the fates of the majorities of 27 countries. Referendums may very well make sense in those situations where the fate of one's land is in question. But when the future of other countries is involved, it is the wrong instrument."

"It would be the wrong move to re-write the Lisbon Treaty yet again. It would be better to continue the ratification process. Then we would see who else falls by the wayside: England? Czech Republic? Poland? Those who ratify the treaty, however, should formalize an agreement among themselves, allowing them to create a core Europe -- without the half-hearted and disruptive members -- leading to closer cooperation and increased integration."

"Such a process would not take place overnight. But just having it as a goal could help restart the sputtering motor of Europe."

The center-right daily Frankfurter Allgemeine writes:

"Maybe it is time to look at reality head on: The European Union will always be faced with the mistrust of its citizens, and this mistrust may very well grow the more powerful the EU becomes. That can't be changed simply be handing the European Parliament new powers because this body is totally alien to most European citizens and is seen as much less important than national parliaments. It is also likely that the EU will not become the homogenous actor on the world stage as many would like it to be. The path to the United States of Europe is one which the Irish, Brits, Poles and Czechs don't want to follow…. In other words, attitudes toward integration in Europe won't change in the near future and neither will Europeans' loyalty to the EU."

"There is, however, a path -- that of differentiated integration…. Each country can decide in which areas it would like more integration and which it would for now like to remain apart. It isn't the easiest path and it makes things even more complicated. But it reflects the principle of European diversity without torpedoing integration or overtaxing traditionalists. There is even a successful blueprint: that of the euro."