The Euro: the root of all evil?
ireland / britain |
economy |
feature
Friday March 04, 2005 21:21 by Andrew Flood - WSM
It makes no sense for us to oppose the EU on the basis of some sort of return to national sovereignty. Rather we must look for ways to create our globalisation agenda out of the process. The protests at the European Summits are proving one way of doing this
It makes no sense for us to oppose the EU on the basis of some sort of return to national sovereignty. Rather we must look for ways to create our globalisation agenda out of the process. The protests at the European Summits are proving one way of doing this
The Euro: the root of all evil?
The arrival of the Euro in its 'real' form of notes and coins is a
key step along the path towards European unification. In Ireland, at
least, it was virtually unopposed save for a few nostalgic articles
about missing the artistry of the old notes and coins.
The Irish media presents a uniform picture of the growth of the EU
in which ministers argue about fish quotas but there is otherwise
little disagreement. The vote against the
Nice treaty in Ireland however
demonstrates there are very large numbers of people suspicious about
the EU project. But you would be hard pushed to find any explanation
of what this suspicion is.
In so far as we get any explanation there is a vague idea that
Nice was voted down because of the anti-freedom, anti women bigots in
groups like Youth Defence somehow managed to trick people into voting
no. This is an angle that suits the government but does not stand up
to any real examination. These forces have always been anti-Europe
yet until Nice European referenda were easily carried. And in general
Irish society in the last decades has moved to greater rather then
less respect for the individual freedoms of women, gays and all the
other groups the bigots despise.
European unification has always had mixed results in Ireland.
Certain elements, particularly those that gave limited support to the
struggles for individual rights, were quite welcome. Others like the
growing formal ties to European militarisation were less welcome but
realistically Ireland's 'neutrality' has always been a bit of a
pro-British/American joke. And most of the economic arguments were
little more then arguments between the gombeen and international
sections of the boss class that are meaningless to Irish workers.
Irish Anarchists have for the most part insisted that we are
against aspects of the way European unification is being, not the
idea of unification. In many ways it should be welcomed by workers as
a move away from the old nationalisms of the 20th century. And also
of course European unification was one of the key goals of the
workers' movements before the war of 1914 smashed such hopes in the
trenches.
As with other aspects of globalisation there is the globalisation
that the bosses wish to accept and the globalisation that the workers
need to impose. For example, the freedom of anyone anywhere on the
planet to travel where ever they like free of border controls.
The EU is key to the bosses' process of
capitalist globalisation. In a
general sense European Unification is providing the motor by which
workers' rights are being reduced to a point near the bottom of the
European average and through which massive industrial and transport
projects are being imposed on reluctant populations who are also
forced to pay for them. Here it provides a handy excuse for the Irish
State when it comes to trying to impose regressive taxes like the
Bin tax.
The decision making structure of the European Union is not widely
understood. In general all we see are the summits where the leaders
of the European states come together to finalise documents that have
been negotiated over the previous years in the shadows.
Lurking in these shadows is a deeply undemocratic process. Many
proposals start off in a rather shadowy body also based in Brussels
called the 'European Round Table of Industrialists' (ERT). This elite
club, formed in 1983 brings together 45 top European corporations
like ICI, BP, Shell, Renault, Bayer, Unilever and Nestlé.
Ireland is 'represented' by Michael Smurfit of Jefferson Smurfit[1].
Perhaps this line up alone explains some of the pro-car and oil
industry decisions that the EU has made in favouring motorway
construction over freight trains for the long distance transport of
goods? The ERT has also been pushing the World Trade Organisation
agenda with the circles of the European bureaucracy.
Many of the provisions of the Single European Act (SEA), for
instance, originated in the ERT document "Europe 1990 - A program
for action". The SEA with its emphasis on a European free trade
zone that would led to further concentration of production in the
most developed regions and the centralisation of production. The
European Commissioner for the Environment estimated that because it
also favoured road (rather then rail) transport it would lead to a
50% increase in heavy road haulage by 2000, some 17 million more
vehicles[2].
One of the components of this transport policy, the 'TENS' will
mean 13,000 km2 of new roads. This leads to massive pollution and a
waste of resources as goods are transported over crazy distances. One
German study found that while the necessary components to produce and
package strawberry yoghurt could all be sourced within a radius of 50
miles they were in fact transported over 7,000 miles[3].
This sort of crazy policy which results in pollution only makes
sense when you understand it has been imposed in the interests of the
European corporations. A 1999 WHO report on Health costs due to road
traffic-related air pollution revealed that car-related pollution
kills more people than car accidents in Austria, France and
Switzerland[4].
The act also favoured large-scale
industrial farming,
which requires huge energy and chemical inputs (again good for the
likes of ICI and Shell). European research money, paid for by the
taxes of European workers, was directed towards genetic engineering,
biotechnology and the chemical pharmaceutical industry rather then
towards minimising unemployment or environmental degradation. Baron
Daniel Janssen of the ERT describes the EC decision making structures
as "extremely open to the business community, so that when
businessmen like me face an issue that needs political input we have
access to excellent Commissioners such as Monti for competition, Lamy
for world trade, and Liikanen for electronic commerce and
industry"[5].
It's estimated that Brussels hosts some 500 industry lobby groups
employing some 10,000 professional lobbyists. 1999 for instance saw a
multi-million Euro lobbying campaign by the biotech companies which
saw the introduction of the industry friendly 'Patents on life'
directive.
It makes no sense for us to oppose the EU on the basis of some
sort of return to national sovereignty. Rather we must look for ways
to create our globalisation agenda out of the process. The protests
at the European Summits are proving one way of doing this. At the
December summit in Brussels between 60,000 and 100,000 took part in
the Trade Union organised demonstration alone. These protests can
also be one of the ways in which we build links across Europe and
create our alternative.
Andrew Flood
1 ERT membership is on their web page at http://www.ert.be
2 Restructuring and Resistance (available from the WSM bookservice
for 13 Euros), p47
3 ibid, p147
4 See http://www.efoa.org/fr/mtbe_air_quality/auto_pollution.htm
5 Restructuring and Resistance , p66
This page has not been translated into Kreyòl ayisyen yet.
This page can be viewed in
English Italiano Deutsch