Imperial Overstretch
Ivo Daalder started not one, but two, threads about the meaning of the French non and Dutch nee votes. He attracted numerous interesting comments. I tried floating an imperial overstretch theory--again, not once but twice:
The EU has long submerged a fundamental division that has now bubbled to the fore.
The center of the continent--France, Germany, Benelux, and perhaps a few others--wanted to see a continental empire gorwing outward. They dreamed of an entirely peaceful takeover of Europe by a dual Franco-German empire, in which Germany ran the economy and France the diplomacy.
The periphery--the UK, Scandinavia, and perhaps a few others--wanted a looser confederation capable of harmonizing regulations related to business, but not too much more. They have long balked at incorporation into a Franco-German empire.
The combination of enlargement and the constitution brought the matter to a head. The enlarged EU diluted the power of the center. The constitution would have restored it. It was never clear where the fissures would manifest themselves first (I’m as stunned as anyone that it was France), but they have long been inevitable. The key question now is whether the imperialists will adopt the confederal model.
It seems that France and Germany, rather than the U.S., are the ones suffering from imperial overstretch.
My post yesterday about “imperial overstretch” didn’t generate much of a response, but your correspondence with Jolyon confirms (at least in my mind) that that is precisely what we’re discussing.
The EU is a marvelous experiment. It is the world’s first voluntary empire. Many empires have brought great benefits to the land and people that they’ve conquered--but they have also imposed significant costs (the Roman and British Empires come immediately to mind).
The voluntary nature of the EU, though, changes the rules. Whereas the UK could conquer India without giving Indians full “Englishman’s rights” (and effectively abolishing white faces from Westminster), the EU has no such option. Growing the empire means accepting new subjects as equals.
In small doses, such growth may be palatable--Jolyon’s thoughts about Romania, Bulgaria, and the Balkans fall into this category. Large doses, like Poland or Turkey, are much more problematic. It’s important to remember that the 10 new countries accepted temporary second-class citizenship, with less-than-full rights in areas like labor mobility.
Too much European history has viewed the Turk as “the other” for me to believe that Europeans will voluntarily go to bed one night knowing that when they awake, one in five Europeans will be a Turk.
The EU may then learn the pitfalls of a voluntary empire: Rather than conquering territory whose occupants clamor for liberation, they may refuse to accept territory whose occupants clamor for inclusion.
No takers.
The trackback URL for this entry is: http://www.theinformationist.com/index/trackback/62/DZXYzqff/
Trackbacks:
No trackbacks yet.Comments:
No comments yet.Next entry: Yglesias v. Friedman
Previous entry: American Antitrust Institute Conference