Instapundit Extra!

April 10, 2002

THE FUTURE OF EUROPE: Here's an exchange of email I had with British solicitor and frequent InstaPundit critic Martin Pratt. I found it enlightening, and I hope you will, too.

From Martin:I got a letter (on paper!) today from the ex principal of the school I taught at in India in my year abroad between Secondary School and University (such a year is becoming more traditional amongst British School leavers, but back in 1992 I felt quite a trailblazer) who asked about how I thought Europe's attitude towards the Muslim world would develop, particularly with regard to the Indo-Pakistan conflict. Hindu/Muslim relations was something he and I had cause to discuss frequently whilst we were stuck in curfews following the destruction of the Babri Mosque by militant Hindus in Ayodhya on 7 December 1992, which resulted in the worst communal violence seen in India since partition.

I am sitting here trying to write a response, but frankly I don't know what to say. The India/Pakistan issue is something I can't see anyone getting hot under the collar about. But regarding the Middle East, as you point out, there has always been partisanship. Despite the British public's traditional pro-Palestinian sympathies, Blair is sticking his neck on the block by supporting Bush and by implication the Israelis. Additionally, the British public's traditional Euro-Scepticism now runs in total conflict with its frank mistrust of Sharon's actions since the 1982 invasion of Lebanon. Added to this the Northern Irish conflict is often mentioned, heavy handed action by the British Army from 1916 onward simply resulted in it being the best recruiting sergeant for the IRA imaginable, pictures of Israeli troops rounding up Palestinian militants remind many here of the disastrous military policies of the British Army in Ulster.

On the other hand we are the only major European country that can say that we had nothing whatever to do with the Holocaust, in fact it get on my nerves certainly to be included in any collective guilt by implication simply because I am a European. Anyway, there are two diametrically opposed traditions in British society which are becoming increasingly hard to reconcile, Arabism and pro-Americanism. Despite the Guardian and the Independent, the most popular dailies in the UK - the Mail, the Telegraph, the Times and the Sun - remain hostile to Europe. Both the Guardian and the Indie are minority reads in their sectors. I know you quote from the Guardian extensively, but the response I got to an enquiry in my short lived blog would suggest that the registration requirements of the Conrad Black owned Telegraph (his wife, Barbara Amiel, quoted the offensive comment dinner party by the French Ambassador regarding Israel) preclude Bloggers from linking to it. Nonetheless, it outsells the Guardian in its paper editions by about 4 to 1.

We are intrinsically a European nation, our habits and sports are European, whereas much of our culture is shared with America. But if economics wins out, and it usually does, then we have free movement of goods and people across the continent, and two thirds of our trade with the EU, as opposed to trade barriers and hard to obtain 30 day tourist visas to visit the US. Sadly, in those circumstances it is not hard to see which way we will jump if we are forced to choose, which I am sure we will be.

My reply:Well, there's a cheerful note. I only hope that when the EU implodes -- and I think it will -- that it does so gently. I'm deeply worried. And I'm not so much worried for the United States -- Europe is a problem for the US, and will be a bigger one, but it's unlikely to be a threat -- but for Europe.

Martin's response:Structurally, if you will excuse my French, the EU is fucked. Totally, it just doesn't work.

Employment Law, my field, is where it has most influence on day to day lives of the average citizen. All the EU does there is re-hash UK discrimination law (which was in turn based largely upon the US Civil Rights Act), screw up the drafting and sell it back to us in an inferior form. Don't get me started, it is absolutely awful. But even in its current utterly crap form, we do get a lot out of it. I don't have to marry my (Danish) girlfriend for her to stay in the UK for example. If they sorted out the constitutional defects, it could be great. I agree that the current structure may well implode, but that would be utterly disastrous for the UK. Metric Martyrs not withstanding.

And I'm pro-Europe for a Brit.

My reply:Well, I've never been against the *idea* of the EU. In fact, back when I used to teach International Business Transactions and would do a survey of EU law (well, it was EC law then) I remember thinking that it made sense. But the execution seems to have gone down the tubes in the last ten years.

I worry about one of two outcomes. The most likely, I fear, is the bureaucratic "our approach is failing -- we must redouble our efforts!" That will cause things to get worse until the collapse is very severe, and the dislocations involved could, under the right circumstances, produce something rather nasty and fascistic along the way, something that will be made worse by the growth of pervasive surveillance, etc.

The other possibility is a "velvet revolution" where everybody just realizes it isn't working and stops. That might produce a soft landing where the good parts -- mobility of people and capital -- stay, while the bureaucracy and dumb regulations don't. The problem as I see it is that too many people have too much invested in the bureaucracy and dumb regulations to let that happen absent a major shock to the system, and maybe not then (see, e.g., Japan as an example; they just can't make the changes that everyone agrees are necessary).

posted at 10:41 AM by Glenn Reynolds

April 01, 2002

BY THE WAY, the whole AOL thing is an April Fools' joke. Just thought I'd point this out, since I've been getting email ranging from "congratulations!" to "screw you, you sellout!"

posted at 09:59 AM by Glenn Reynolds