Britain's EU referendum:
is Blair gambling his career and Britain's future?

By Christina Sklebar
Global Beat Syndicate

LONDON--Prime Minister Tony Blair's April announcement to vote on the European Constitution this autumn has dismayed supporters and opponents alike. Constitution supporters believe this will finally establish Britain's role in Europe and bundle numerous treaties together into one document. But has Blair timed it badly?

Despite EU supporters gearing up for a strong campaign, many are worried, including Blair himself. Recent polls show a majority of Britons strongly oppose a European Constitution, and by implication, "full" EU membership. The predominantly Euro-sceptic Conservative Party emphasizes the advantages of remaining within a free trade area but opposes the extension of EU powers into social and security policy fields--a view apparently shared by a majority of British citizens.  

At his recent monthly news conference, Mr. Blair admitted that losing the referendum would risk not only his political career, but could end Britain's EU membership and its influence within the Union. Many pro-Europeans hope that this dire possibility could shift staunch opponents, but pessimists argue that the referendum will cause political and economic setbacks for Britain, which are misunderstood by the Constitution's detractors.

In contrast to the rest of Europe, giving the EU more power is still a hot debate in Britain.   Euro-sceptics blame European "red tape" for damaging productivity and business competitiveness. Opponents point out that, if adopted, the introduction of qualified majority voting, activist senior court judges and stronger EU constitutional powers will significantly weaken British powers. Historically, neither Britain nor Europe is entirely ready for centralization.

Until the 1960s, Labour and Conservative governments were more concerned with Britain's Commonwealth and U.S. ties. Winston Churchill disapproved of Western European integration and Harold Wilson was faced with a divided Labour Party on EEC membership. Blair's predecessors, Margaret Thatcher and John Major, completely rejected any attempt to deepen integration. Many analysts point out that although Labour has a more constructive approach to the EU, its policies have remained somewhat aloof.   During its first years, the Blair government only managed further EU integration in cases where it did not interfere in British affairs that could be achieved nationally.

Annoyed by British hesitancy and hindered by various special relationships, Europe has much to resolve. The EU has a far tougher task than its American counterparts in trying to bring cohesion to a melting pot of strident nationalism and proud linguistic heritages and cultures that are resistant to easy co-existence. Historically, Europe has engaged in internecine wars for more years than there has been peace. In May, Europe became a combination of former communist, Mediterranean and Western European states with 20 different languages. In this EU "melting pot" we have corruption issues in France and Italy, weak economies in Germany, Greece and Eastern Europe and an inability to agree on a feasible defense policy.

Undeniably, Europe and Britain have many issues to contend with, but a British "no" to the Constitution has heavy political implications. If France or Germany turned down the constitution, it would go back on the drawing board. But Britain turning its back on the constitution could mean walking away from Europe. Now that   Tony Blair has thrown down the gauntlet, the British public must choose its path--alone or united.