Two views

The view from Berlin...

European Politicians Slam British EU Veto

Following David Cameron's veto of EU treaty reform, there is plenty of frustration in Europe over Britain's stubborn attitude in the battle against the debt crisis. Prominent members of the European Parliament have strongly criticized the British prime minister and sent him a clear message: Europe doesn't need you.

der Spiegel,

9 December, 2011

It is an irony of history -- on this very day 20 years ago, the Maastricht Treaty was signed, bringing the European Union into existence. On Dec. 9 and 10, 1991, the 12 leaders of the European Community agreed to the groundbreaking agreement and a historic project was set on its way.

Two decades on, and with the European debt crisis in full flow, the EU is facing its toughest test so far. Now one person stands out as the most divisive figure: David Cameron. Following marathon talks on Thursday night, the British prime minister vetoed a change in the EU treaties as called for by German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Nicolas Sarkozy.

Cameron's use of his veto has provided for much discontent within the European Parliament. "It was a mistake to admit the British into the European Union," said Alexander Graf Lambsdorff, a prominent German MEP with the business-friendly Free Democrats, and vice chair of ALDE, the liberal block in the European Parliament. The UK must now renegotiate its relationship with the EU, he said. "Either they do it by themselves, or the EU will be founded anew -- without Great Britain," Lambsdorff said. "Switzerland is also a possible role model for the British," he added, refering to the fiercely independent stance of the Alpine country, which is not an EU member.

Harsh Attacks and Clear Frustration

There has also been sharp criticism of Cameron's attitude from the co-chairman of the Greens group in the European Parliament, Franco-German politician Daniel Cohn-Bendit. "Cameron is a coward," he said. He accused the British prime minister of not wanting to deal with the conflict over the Europe Union within his Conservative Party. Cameron, he said, had "manoeuvred himself into a populist corner" from which he would no longer emerge.

Elmar Brok, a member of Germany's conservative Christian Democratic Union and foreign policy spokesman for the center-right European People's Party (EPP), said: "If you're not willing to stick to the rules, you should keep your mouth shut."

These are harsh attacks. But despite all the frustration, the message is clear: The European project can not be allowed to collapse because of the UK's obstinate attitude towards the debt crisis. Cameron's critics are sending a clear signal to London: If necessary, things can carry on without you. Those critics are clearly hoping that Britain's decision will come back to haunt it at some point, and that the country will come to realize what a serious mistake it was committing when it turned its back on Europe.

This approach is also apparently being followed at the highest level. The 17 euro-zone states, together with at least six and maybe as many as nine other EU countries, aim to conclude a separate stability treaty in order to defuse the debt crisis. It's a risky step, because it is not yet clear whether the proposal can easily be implemented legally. But those member states are also sending a signal, namely that they can move forward without the British.

Cameron's behavior in Brussels has also irritated many MEPs. The British prime minister downright flaunted his veto, or at least so it appears to his critics. "What was on offer was not in Britain's interest … so I didn't sign up to it," Cameron said. A little later, he made it clear that his country would not want to adopt the euro in the future either -- he was happy not to be in the Schengen Agreement, and happy not to be in the euro, he said.

'You Can't Be a Little Bit Pregnant'

Manfred Weber, vice chairman of the European People's Party, was annoyed about Cameron's "distancing rhetoric." But at the same time he believes it was ill-advised from the viewpoint of the prime minister: "The country is primarily damaging itself." The British must now decide if they want to be in the EU club or not, he says. "The game of always wanting to have a say in the debate while also wrecking every compromise is not acceptable in the long run," says Weber. "You can't be a little bit pregnant."

Reinhard Bütikofer, vice chairman of the Greens/European Free Alliance block in the European Parliament, also sees Britain as facing an historic decision. He would like the British to continue being part of the fold, he said, "but on Europe's terms, rather than Cameron's." It was not, however, currently necessary to exert excessive pressure, let alone make threats, he said, explaining that the prime minister's veto was a clear "sign of weakness."

Others were rather more forceful in that respect. Elmar Brok, for example, feels that the UK is one of Europe's most important partners, "but in a crisis, a partner must above all be loyal and ready to compromise." The other partners must now marginalize Britain, "so that the country comes to feel its loss of influence," he said.

Manfred Weber also urged EU member states to demonstrate more self-confidence. "It must be made clear to Great Britain: Either you want the whole package, or you can leave it alone."

Some believe they already know how to make that happen, namely by taking a clear political stance. "Now," says Green politician Cohn-Bendit, "we must put pressure on the British and force them, by implementing tough regulations on financial markets, to decide if they want out of the EU or if they want to stay inside."

And from the Eurosceptic Telegraph

EU treaty: David Cameron stands as the lone man of Europe

David Cameron took a decisive step to distance Britain from the European Union on Friday as he became the first prime minister to veto a new EU treaty.

the Telegraph, 

9 December, 2011

Mr Cameron provoked widespread anger among European leaders by refusing to back a deal to rescue the eurozone, delighting Tories and raising questions about Britain’s future in the EU.

After Nicolas Sarkozy, the French president, led objections to his “unacceptable” demands for legal protections for the City of London, the Prime Minister refused to give Britain’s backing for a new treaty to create a “fiscal union” among eurozone members.

At the end of an acrimonious summit in Brussels, all 26 other EU members signalled they could now support the new treaty, leaving Britain in a minority of one.

Conservative MPs welcomed Britain’s move back towards the traditional Tory stance of “splendid isolation” in Europe — a term for the foreign policy of the late 19th century.

Liberal Democrats said the move would reduce Britain’s influence. Nick Clegg, the Deputy Prime Minister, raised fears of a “two-speed Europe,” a prospect rejected by Conservative ministers.

European leaders and Tory sceptics alike suggested that Mr Cameron had set Britain on a course that could end with departure from the EU. The Prime Minister insisted he was committed to the EU, but acknowledged the uncertainties he had unleashed.

“Membership is in our interests,” he said. “I’ve always said if that’s the case I’ll support our membership.”

Paris and Berlin will now try to agree a treaty outside the EU that commits the eurozone members to new limits on their deficits, in an effort to restore financial markets’ confidence. As well as the 17 countries using the single currency, the nine other EU members could also sign up, making Britain the only member outside the “euro-plus” bloc.

Despite initial signs that Hungary would remain outside the treaty, it later said it was likely to sign. Sweden and the Czech Republic sympathised with Mr Cameron’s position, but signalled they too could sign up.

The new group’s creation prompted warnings that a eurozone “caucus” would use its voting power to impose rules to Britain’s detriment.

Tories fear an enhanced euro group could try to impose a financial transactions tax on Britain. The Government estimates that the tax could cost the country £26?billion a year.

Mr Cameron also faces a legal and political battle to stop the new group using the European Commission, the European Court of Justice and their staff and buildings to support its new budget rules.

As institutions created and funded by all 27 EU members, they should not be used for non-EU work, he said

Carl Bildt, the Swedish foreign minister, said he was “worried that Britain is starting to drift away from Europe”. Guy Verhofstadt, a senior MEP, said Mr Cameron’s decision “leaves the UK outside the economic policies of the EU”.

Mario Monti, the new Italian prime minister, said Mr Cameron’s decision would lead to “a certain isolation” of Britain. Some EU officials warned that Mr Cameron had sparked long-term hostility to Britain. The Prime Minister dismissed such warnings, insisting that the decision related to the euro and would not affect other aspects of the EU.

“Britain’s membership of the European Union, membership of the single market, influence in the European Union will be maintained,” he said.

Back in Britain, the early morning news was greeted with jubilation by Conservatives. Boris Johnson, the Mayor of London, said the Prime Minister had “played a blinder”.

Many Tory MPs said this should be the beginning of Britain’s journey away from the heart of the EU rather than the end.

Mark Pritchard, the secretary of the 1922 Committee of back-bench Tory MPs, said the Government would have to order a referendum on the EU before 2015.

Mr Cameron insisted that he was not interested in the looser relationship with the EU sought by some of his party.

“Britain is in the European Union because it is good for British jobs, for British investment, for British trade,” he said. “We are a trading nation, we need those markets open.”

The summit saw bad-tempered exchanges between Britain and France, and some diplomats believe Anglo-French relations will suffer long-term damage from the spat.

Mr Sarkozy described Mr Cameron’s proposals to protect the City of London as “unacceptable”.

Michael Gove, the Education Secretary, insisted that Mr Cameron had been right. “Just because you are in a minority it doesn’t mean that you are wrong,” he said. But he also admitted he could not say what the events would mean for Britain’s position in Europe.

However, the new European policy could put strain on the Coalition. One Lib Dem MEP said Mr Cameron had “betrayed” Britain.

Ed Miliband, the Labour leader, said Britain’s isolated position was a “terrible outcome”. He said: “Frankly, David Cameron mishandled these negotiations spectacularly.”

Analysis: Sarkozy, Draghi winners in EU rift, Cameron loses

(Reuters) - Napoleon dreamed of it, De Gaulle fought for it, but Nicolas Sarkozy may have achieved it -- a Europe of Nations with France in the cockpit and Britain on the sidelines.

The French president emerged as one of the big winners of a European Union summit on Friday which ended with up to 26 member states agreeing to move forward in economic integration around the euro zone, and Britain alone in staying out.

"Of course this is not just a long-standing desire, but a long-standing goal of French politics ... because in the French tradition Britain never really belonged to the European Union, dating back to De Gaulle," said a senior EU official who attended the summit, referring to the French president's veto of British entry in 1963 and again in 1967.

By obstructing the wish of the other EU members to amend the bloc's governing Lisbon treaty to allow closer fiscal union among the 17-nation single currency area, British Prime Minister David Cameron managed to unite Europe against him.

He may be feted by Eurosceptics at home, but he emerged as the biggest diplomatic loser of the summit, leading his country into an isolation that all his predecessors sought to avoid.

For article GO HERE