2015年-CEPS欧洲政策研究中心_Seven_Hazards_in_Camerons_Intended_European_Policy_4页_347kb

Summary of "Seven Hazards in Cameron's Intended European Policy"

Core Content

Michael Emerson, a Senior Associate Research Fellow at CEPS, outlines seven major hazards that could undermine the success of the UK's intended European policy under the then-British Prime Minister. The policy, as outlined in a speech on January 18th, 2013, aimed to rebalance the UK's relationship with the EU by repatriating competences and renegotiating terms. However, Emerson argues that unless the Prime Minister changes his approach, these hazards could lead to political, economic, and international instability.

Main Hazards

1. Defining Core Objectives

   • The UK's existing opt-outs from the eurozone and Schengen area limit the scope for further withdrawal.
   • Proposals to repeal the implementation of EU law in the Freedom, Security and Justice (FSJ) area are seen as populist and contrived.
   • The working time directive and other social policies are subject to political instability due to the UK's history of opting in and out.

2. Negotiating Style and Tactics

   • The Prime Minister's approach of either getting his way or blocking EU proposals is being called "blackmail".
   • This tactic risks damaging the UK's reputation as a fair player and may lead to increased opposition.
   • It could also provoke escalating conflict over issues like the UK budget rebate.

3. Political Manageability and Referendum Risks

   • A referendum on EU policy may lead to misinterpretation of the question by voters.
   • The referendum could become a proxy for broader political discontent, such as dissatisfaction with the economy or government performance.
   • This could push the UK toward secession, contrary to the Prime Minister's stated intentions.

4. Unintended Slide into Secession

   • Secession from the EU would result in loss of influence over the single market, which is a key area of UK-EU engagement.
   • The UK would lose sovereignty over evolving single market regulations and face higher financial obligations.
   • It would also lose budgetary savings and be forced to pay into EU structural funds.

5. Economic Uncertainty and Investment Deterrence

   • Strategic uncertainty surrounding the UK's EU future may discourage multinational corporations from investing in the UK.
   • Close EU neighbors like France, Germany, and Ireland may capitalize on this uncertainty to attract investment.
   • This could harm the UK economy, which is already struggling with recession.

6. Domestic Political Instability in the UK

   • A potential EU referendum could intensify demands for a Scottish referendum on independence.
   • Scottish nationalists, who favor EU membership, may see UK secession as a threat to their interests.
   • This could lead to complicated political negotiations and public confusion about the UK's future.

7. International Relations and Global Standing

   • The UK's special relationship with the US is at risk if it weakens its position within the EU.
   • Traditional allies in the EU, such as the Nordics and Benelux, are disillusioned with the UK's stance.
   • The UK's international prestige with countries like China and Russia may decline, and its role in global institutions such as the UN Security Council could be diminished.

Key Information

• The UK's opt-outs are limited, and further withdrawal may not be feasible or beneficial.
• The proposed policy risks damage to the UK's political image, economic competitiveness, and international alliances.
• A referendum on EU policy could trigger unintended domestic political consequences, including Scottish independence debates.
• The UK's current resistance to EU foreign policy integration could harm its global influence and miss opportunities for leadership.
• The EU's institutional structure and regulatory framework make secession a highly disadvantageous option for the UK.

Conclusion

Emerson emphasizes that while the seven hazards are now part of public debate, the UK's democratic processes must be allowed to assess the arguments and reach an informed decision. The Prime Minister's responsibility is to avoid locking the UK into a path of political and economic damage, and to reconsider the approach to EU relations to ensure stability and long-term benefits for both the UK and the EU.