|
|
From a British perspective the deal offered Mr Cameron by Donald Tusk, president of the European Council, is at once substantively inconsequential and politically critical. The EU “outs” are wrong about most things but they happen to be right in saying the proposed package does not alter fundamentally Britain’s relationship with Brussels. That was never on offer. The best to be said is that some of the reforms are useful and the rest harmless. They leave Britain still more semi-detached but do not offend the EU’s ruling principles. [...]
Why should Europe bail out a prime minister apparently in thrall to nationalists in his own party?
The answer, maddening though it may be, is that times have changed. Ten years ago, the eurozone still looked like a haven of stability; Poland, Hungary and other formerly communist states now taking an illiberal turn had only just signed up to the union’s brand of liberal democracy. To the extent that it made the news, migration was measured against a need to find young new recruits for an ageing workforce.
Now the EU cannot afford another blow. The eurozone crisis has been contained, but not resolved. The tide of refugees making their way across the Aegean and the Mediterranean has divided nations between north and south and east and west. Governments and established parties across the continent are under siege from rising populism. This is not the moment to lose even as awkward a member as Britain. [...]Brexit would hand a banner to anti-EU populists and would add to a self-sustaining sense that the postwar European project is unravelling. [...]
For all its habit of dining à la carte, Britain has economic and political clout, military resources and diplomatic skills that will be in strong demand during the next few years. No, it cannot help fix the eurozone but it can be a vital player — dare one say it, even a leader — in an effort to stabilise Europe’s neighbourhood.
Step back from the maelstrom of political controversy about the influx of refugees from Syria and migrants from the Maghreb and the task for Europe’s next decade speaks for itself. [...]
What is needed first is a change of mindset: an understanding that there are no quick fixes in the form of some aid here or military intervention there. What we are talking about is a project lasting a decade or more to promote security and prosperity. [...]
It is hard to imagine such an effort without Britain — along with France, one of the two EU nations with the history, outlook and capacity required to lead it. Both are needed. If Mr Cameron wins his referendum, here would be his chance for a place in the history books.
Full article on Financial Times (subscription required)