Could Britain’s Exit from the EU Result in Conflict?
COULD BRITAIN’S EXIT FROM THE EU RESULT IN CONFLICT? – According to Germany’s Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeirer, the continuous rise in the number of eurosceptics in Britain and other EU member states is a worrying development for the Union that has helped keep peace for more than 50 years; something that might be at risk if Britain is permitted to pull out of the European Union.
Mr. Steinmeirer went on to state that it was ‘nationalism’ that caused the First World War and it was the European Union that brought countries together in order to settle their political differences peacefully, therefore avoiding any type of conflict.
Mr. Steinmeirer is considerably concerned that Britain’s exit from the EU could have far reaching consequence.
What is surprising is that Mr. Steinmeirer told the conference that he wasn’t against David Cameron’s plans to reform Britain’s involvement; that is to change EU treaties so that some powers can be reverted back to individual parliaments.
In the words of the Bard, ‘there lies the rub’ for I doubt many people in Britain are in fact opposed to the European Union if only it was restricted to trade and free movement, to a degree.
The issue here is one of control in that the EU has incessantly reached for more control over how member states are governed; in some people’s eyes the federalisation has simply gone too far and as such, the movement is clearly undemocratic.
Whilst Mr. Steinmeirer might consider the possible ramifications by Britain pulling out, I wonder if he has considered whether such conflict might occur if Britain remains.
Nobody likes to be oppressed and this is never more disdainful than when oppression comes from a foreign power; therefore if the people of Britain are continuously pushed in a direction they refuse to go this could in fact cause a conflict, one that would clearly take on the persona of a nationalist movement.
Mr. Steinmeirer also goes on to say that we have learned to deal with differing opinions in a more civilised manner which cannot be questioned. Mr. Steinmeirer may well have a point but are Britain’s opinions being taken on board or summarily dismissed by what are seen as little more than non-elected despot dictators in the EU Parliament?
Prosperity, harmony and therefore peace should be the goals of the European Union but increasingly it appears more of control; a control that Britain and other EU member states will only tolerate for so long before taking a stand.
It is visibly evident that we can trade, we can even move freely, but whether we can accept an growing entity that has totalitarian designs is something that cannot and will not be tolerated.
We’ve already seen distinct public opinion regarding the EU’s volumes of legislation through the ever increasing popularity of UKIP who want to pull out of the EU immediately.
It is most likely that UKIP will experience a landslide victory in the May 2014 European Elections which will give even more weight to public sentiment on pulling out.
We’ve listened to the continuous rhetoric of David Cameron and his plans to renegotiate Britain’s position and as yet nothing has been achieved.
This in itself is not surprising for the EU has told Mr. Cameron on numerous occasions that there is no renegotiating and that Britain will have to abide by all EU laws; it’s either that or pull out and this is something Mr. Cameron is extremely reluctant to consider as an option.
Yes we’ve had the promises, the pledges and the vows to offer up an EU referendum in 2017 but it became apparent recently that such a referendum is unlikely to be passed in the House of Lords; this leaves many to think that a dictatorship is alive and well at home and in the EU.
It could be argued that the unrest in European Union is simply down to the EU wanting to initiate a one-party police state; something typical of the socialist agenda.
Another valid point is that of cash; it is often perceived that if Britain pulled out of the EU it wouldn’t last more than a year without Britain’s continuous financial support.
Such would result in a collapse leaving most EU commissioners out of a job that pays over £250,000 a year for doing almost nothing – yes going from that sort of money to life of the dole is not an attractive proposition for any EU commissioner.
Mr. Steinmeirer talks of conflict, meaning war, but I doubt any British national holds any level of animosity towards say a German national and I would say this was mirrored in Germany. The issues here are not one of the people against the people but rather the people, of all EU member states, being against the European Union.
There is no reason why the European Union couldn’t be disbanded and simply have Government to Government agreements that would allow for free movement of people, trade and finance and without the interference from what is little more than a third party with those attempting to justify their jobs.
The crux of the matter is interference and over-bearing control and unless we put a stop to it then the level of animosity will grow and eventually lead to what Mr. Steinmeirer fears; that being open conflict.
Ask the partners of any business what makes a partnership work and they will tell you first and foremost it’s about respect and allowing individualism to shine through; this is not what any EU member state is experiencing from Brussels but rather crude control through mountains of legislation.
The European Union might have been a good idea at one point but when you give so much power to just a few they ultimately become corrupt and with each piece of control gained they inevitably hunger for more.
Few now see the need for central control and maybe it is time all member states agreed to dismember the EU and then sit around the table and negotiate with one another; at least on this level it becomes far more personal in that firmer friendships can be cemented in order to produce an agreement that is beneficial to both sides.