“It’s deja vu all over again”, as the famous U.S baseball player Yogi Berra said. The latest polls show Irish voters’ getting ready to reject the Lisbon Treaty, much like they rejected the Nice Treaty seven years ago. Even though the campaign is not over, it is probably not too soon to speculate about the consequences of a “No” vote.
The rejection of the Lisbon Treaty will pose a huge headache for Europe’s leaders, who negotiated the accord after the rejection of the European Constitution by French and Dutch voters.
Even though things would perhaps not be as dire as they were in 2001 – when the Nice Treaty was seen as necessary for the Union’s expansion – a rejection of the Treaty would hobble the Union. The always sensible Andrew Duff writes why here.
Besides the effects on the Irish government – which thought it would be rejection-proof without Bertie Ehaern as Prime Minister – a rejection will lead to an extended period of navel-gazing. The French EU Presidency would be focused on the issue entirely, as would that of the Czech Republic. Real business would be pushed to one side.
Three options are possible. First, another referendum in Ireland, probably within the next 18 months. The search would be on for “concessions” to be offered Dublin much like the Danish op-outs offered to Copenhagen when the Danes rejected the Amsterdam Treaty. A key issue might be ESDP, which is sensitive in neutral Ireland. But given the two Irish votes on the Nice Treaty, another twirl of the referendum merry-go-round might be too much.
The second option might be for all the other countries to ignore Ireland’s decision and to plough on, letting Dublin know that it can either jump on board or jump off.
On this argument, four million should not be able to hold back the rest of Europe. But this nuclear option would be very risky and unpopular in many countries. The third option would be a long period of “reflection” with EU leaders basically pushing the issue off until at least the Swedish EU Presidency in 2010.
Either way, a rejection can hardly come at a worse time. Britain’s Gordon Brown is paralysed after the Crewe by-election and is unlikely to welcome a lengthy debate about Europe’s machinery. Any concession to Dublin would be an embarrassment for his government, which claimed that the Lisbon Treaty had to be accepted in its entirety.
President Sarkozy and Chancellor Merkel did the most to rejuvenate the Constitution…woops I mean Treaty. But their relationship has deteriorated markedly over the last year. With the SPD at the lowest point in the polls ever, this could be a tough issue for the German power-sharing government while Sarko needs thi sissues as much as he needs a third leg. Finally, the arrival of Silvio Berlusconi on the scene will not make matters easier.
One way out, as my colleague Jose Igancio Torreblanca says, could for the Lisbon Treaty to be applied to those EU states who voted ratified the Treaty, whenever 2/3 of Member States did so. In this way, the “No” votes would only affect those who voted to reject the Treaty, who should then opt-out totally or selectively, but would let the others move forward. But what about the change to the voting procedures. Would Ireland not be able to vote on those matters?
Bottom-line, if the Irish vote “No” it won’t be just a set-back, but a major problem for the EU.
