An Empire Threatened
TimeWatch Editorial
June 20, 2016
On 7 February 1992 an important treaty was signed in Europe. It was called, the Treaty on European Union and was signed in Maastricht. Article A of that Treaty gives a synopsis of its intent.
|
By this Treaty, the High Contracting Parties establish among themselves a European Union, herein after called ‘the Union'. This Treaty marks a new stage in the process of creating an ever closer union among the peoples of Europe, in which decisions are taken as closely as possible to the citizen. The Union shall be founded on the European Communities, supplemented by the policies and forms of cooperation established by this Treaty. Its task shall be to organize, in a manner demonstrating consistency and solidarity, relations between the Member States and between their peoples. |
On January 6, 2016, we published an article entitled “The Rise of An Empire, Part 1. In that article, we made the point that the European Union did not begin with the Maastricht Treaty. On April 18, 1951, France, Germany, Italy, Belgium, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands signed an agreement called the ‘Treaty of Paris.’ This treaty created something called the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC). Then, in 1957, the ‘Treaty of Rome’ was signed by Belgium, France, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and West Germany. The official name of this Treaty of Rome was the “Treaty establishing the European Economic Community” or the TEEC.
We also made the point that although this appeared to be a harmless attempt to strengthen the economies of the nations involved; these apparently innocent treaties were nothing less than the covert beginnings of the process of recreating a “Federal Europe,” a revived Holy Roman Empire. Recently however, Europe has been experiencing a level of discomfort that was originally unexpected. Financial issues have plagued the Union, creating the sort of imbalance that has brought a great amount of dissatisfaction among member nations.
Beginning as early as 2004, 2005 member nations found it a challenge to maintain their economic health without assistance, so that by the end of 2009. A number of the states were way beyond their ability to fulfill their financial obligations. Greece, Portugal, Ireland, Spain and Cyprus found it impossible to repay their government’s mounting debt. It was also impossible for them to refinance that debt or even bail out the banks that were also in trouble. It now became necessary for them to apply for assistance from other wealthier countries or the European Central Bank (ECB), or in some cases, the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
On May 31, 2016, Yanis Varoufakis published an article entitled The Soup Kitchens of Athens in the New York Times about conditions in Greece. This is some of what he had to say:
“By 2013, more than a third of Greeks were living below the poverty line. By 2014, government wages and pensions had been cut 12 times in four years. In comparative terms, by the proportion of national income diverted to reducing budget deficits, Greece had absorbed austerity measures almost nine times the magnitude of those imposed in Italy and about three times Portugal’s. The result? Between 2009 and 2014, Italy’s economy grew by a paltry 2 percent and Portugal’s contracted by 1 percent; in the same period, Greece’s national income dwindled by a catastrophic 26.6 percent — about the same as for America in the depths of the Great Depression. The result was a humanitarian disaster only a 21st-century John Steinbeck could adequately describe.” Yanis Varoufakis, “The Soup Kitchens of Athens, the New York Times,” May 31, 2016.
It is not surprising therefore that there are those who have voiced the idea that leaving the European Union could certainly not be worse than what they have been experiencing. According to the British Journal, “The Week” published May 4, 2016: “on 23 June the UK will settle a question that's been rumbling close to the surface of British politics for a generation: should the country remain within the European Union, or leave the organization and go it alone.”
“Leaving the EU would result in an immediate cost saving, as the country would no longer contribute to the EU budget. Last year, Britain paid in £13bn, but it also received £4.5bn worth of spending, says Full Fact "so the UK's net contribution was £8.5bn". That's about 7 per cent of what the Government spends on the NHS each year.” “The Week”EU referendum: Pros and cons of Britain voting to leave Europe
In the midst of all this debate, one of the up and coming stars of the Labor Party, who has been arguing for Britain to remain in the EU, has been murdered in the street.
“Jo Cox, 41, a lawmaker for the opposition Labor Party and a vocal advocate for Britain remaining in the European Union, was attacked while preparing to meet constituents in Birstall near Leeds in northern England. Media reports said she had been shot and stabbed. West Yorkshire regional police said a 52-year-old man was arrested by officers nearby and weapons including a firearm recovered. "We are not in a position to discuss any motive at this time," said Temporary Chief Constable Dee Collins.” Craig Brough, Fri Jun 17, 2016, British lawmaker shot dead, EU referendum campaigns suspended
Whatever the motive turns out to be, the stakes remain high and the implications remain complex.
Cameron A. Bowen
