On "balkanization," professor Sandy Levinson argues that the European Union should abandon its quest for unanimous ratification and should instead adopt allow ratification by a majority of European countries -- Levinson's post.
A few thoughts:
Professor Levinson is right that requiring unanimity makes it much harder for a constitutional framework or treaty to be adopted. However, this is at it must be -- Europe is not a nation, state or country, and no one wants to be bound by decisions of citizens of another country. Imagine adopting a new regional trade agreement whereby the U.S. is bound by the decisions of Canada and Mexico...
However, all of this is changing; many people in Europe are living the "European" dream -- they live, marry and pursue their happiness across borders while enjoying the best that this diverse group of countries called Europe has to offer. If you were an older English couple, would you not rather sip a Burgundy red while watching the sun set in Cyprus or Seville as opposed to saving up pounds for the heater in Bradford? Or if you were a young and ambitious French or German person, why not live in London for a few years with your Swedish boyfriend while entering the world of sophisticated financial products? Given sufficient time, professor Levinson's suggestion may therefore well become a solution that IS palatable to most Europeans.
In the meantime, comments from U.S. neocons that the U.S. is better and unafraid of Europe merely show the binary mindset of those on the "right." Why not acknowledge that there is more that unites us than there is that divides us (that is, once the current awful regime has been sent back to Texas and Wyoming) and just let others be and pursue life, liberty and happiness? You know those unalienable rights?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment