The fight to save liberal democracy begins here
The battle lines have been drawn again in the Lisbon debate and we can now see them with a clarity denied to us before the June fiasco, when the 'No' campaigners befuddled so many voters with their garbage about sovereignty, abortion and the detention of three-year-old children.
Nothing less faces us -- and Europe -- than a choice between liberal democracy and the unholy alliance between the 'economic right' and the fundamentalists. The alliance is more than a little reminiscent of the Republican line-up in the American presidential election.
The fundamentalists may be daft, but that does not make them any less dangerous. They have voting power. They used it before and will use it again. At least we all know who they are. To identify, much less describe, the real leaders is harder, but Vaclav Klaus's visit gave us a clue because it prompted us to look at his record.
The story goes that in 1989, shortly after the Velvet Revolution in the then Czechoslovakia, Vaclav Havel and the lads were sitting around in a smoke-filled room wondering what they should do with their freedom now that they had it. A man of undistinguished appearance entered the room. He said: "I am Dr Vaclav Klaus. You don't know me but you'll need me."
Wikipedia gives a less colourful version. Dr Klaus, it says, made up one of a 'bunch' of economists who went to see Havel and gave him a similar message: That the country's economic future lay in the implementation of what were then called 'Thatcherite' policies.
One way or the other, Dr Klaus took charge of the economy and implemented policies which would have horrified Margaret Thatcher. They resulted in what Mr Havel called 'gangster capitalism'. He and Dr Klaus became bitter enemies.
Is gangster capitalism practised in more imposing countries? Look no further than the Land of the Bear. Under the reigns of Boris Yeltsin and Vladimir Putin, the assets of the Russian state and people have been looted on a scale unprecedented in history. And Dr Klaus admires Putin. He also admires the American neo-cons, who have helped to give us the global financial crisis.
This is the man who during his visit to Dublin was feted in the Shelbourne Hotel, along with many other interesting people. That event took place, impudently, almost on the doorstep of our seat of government in Merrion Street.
Its defenders ask, why not? After all, other European leaders openly took the Irish Government's side in the Lisbon debate. The answer is that those leaders supported a partner-government. Dr Klaus and his hosts used the occasion to oppose it. They are entitled to express their opinions, but it was a breach of protocol.
It was also a nasty piece of triumphalism. They have the June referendum result under their belt. They have plenty of money, though they won't tell us how much or where it came from. They have friends in addition to Putin and the neo-cons: for example, the United Kingdom Independence Party, the Leprechauns of Strasbourg.
The UKIP want Britain out of the EU. They could get their wish if the Conservatives win the next British general election and David Cameron is forced to act against the interests of his party and his country and (presumably) his own inclinations.
If that -- thankfully, unlikely -- event occurred, it would provoke a crisis for the EU. But we don't have to look across the water for the makings of a crisis. We created one ourselves in June, and if we do not reverse our decision we will have the real thing.
I don't believe that the rulers of Britain, be they Labour or the Tories, will allow the anti-Europe mixum-gatherum to endanger liberal democracy. The same is true of the rulers of France, Germany and other countries, big and small. Ireland -- tiny, marginal and powerless -- is another matter.
The Institute of International and European Affairs has published a document entitled Ireland's Future After Lisbon. It sets out a variety of 'options', ranging from the abandonment of the project, to a second No vote and the collapse of the ratification process. But the 'options', which might have been better described as scenarios, are scary, some bordering on the apocalyptic.
Among them are a negative impact on foreign investment and exclusion from decision-making. We have already experienced a diminution in our standing which may never be repaired. However, this is small potatoes compared with the worst-case scenarios for Europe and Ireland.
The EU could fragment, becoming starkly exposed to disastrous economic and security consequences. In such a scenario, the large countries would protect themselves.
They would have little interest in protecting Ireland. Our economy would be wrecked. Our currency would become worthless, like that of Iceland, unless we managed to stay in the currency union. And our security and economic dependence on Britain would increase. In other words, we would lose the independence Irish political leaders laboured for in the past. Does anyone want that?
Perhaps a handful of the lesser members of the 'No' camp do want it. The British establishment assuredly does not. A couple of months ago Ivor Roberts, former ambassador in Dublin, wrote, in the 'Sunday Independent', that the British have no wish to take us over again. Given the choice, I much prefer Ivor Roberts to Vaclav Klaus. But we don't have to make that choice. We can still fight our way back to economic strength and political independence.
jdowney@independent.ie
