WORLD VIEW: The debate on Europe needs to go beyond Boston and Berlin. Is Ireland European? Or have we packed our bags and gone to America? Eamon Delaney (Opinion, January 7th) argues that Ireland is culturally and economically closer to "Boston" than to "Berlin", adding that this puts Ireland into a Euro-sceptic pro-American camp.
However, favouring "Bostonian" economics over those from Berlin, or having strong cultural ties with the US, does not make Ireland less "European".
No one would deny Ireland's close ties with the US; ties which intensified throughout the 1990s with American involvement in Northern Ireland and the influx of American money into the Irish economy. Ireland's economic policies today are closer to the US model of lower taxes and labour flexibility than the European model of higher taxes and labour rigidity.
However, Ireland is still very much part of the European economy; and Ireland is not alone in following a more "American" approach to economic policy. Silvio Berlusconi of Italy, Jose-Marie Aznar of Spain, and Tony Blair of Britain all favour some US-style reforms for the European economy. Moreover, many of the EU applicant states, such as Estonia, Hungary, and Slovenia, share a similar liking for "Bostonian" economics.
In addition, the EU is no longer about economics alone; it is also about many other issues, such as external affairs and internal security. And when it comes to political questions, like the death penalty and the environment, Ireland is usually much closer to our European partners than our American friends.
"Boston v Berlin" is helpful for the economic debate, but perhaps not so useful for the political debate on Europe.
If Ireland really were politically closer to Boston, then why isn't there a single politician arguing for Ireland to join NATO, the most important European-American institution? Or better still, is anyone seriously suggesting that Ireland become the 51st state? Or even just pull out of the EU? The answer is "no", because Ireland is an independent European nation-state. Aside from the national question, our relationship with Europe is our most important foreign policy issue.
Why is the EU so important? The rapid removal of political and economic barriers across the globe during the last 10 years has led to much closer links between the US, Europe and the rest of the world. According to a recent study by Foreign Policy magazine, Ireland is the most "globalised" country in the world economically, and a clear beneficiary from the removal of economic and political barriers.
But these exciting new economic opportunities have brought many political challenges, such as international terrorism and immigration. But the EU is changing: it is doing more than it used to, and many more states want to join. The central question is how an enlarged EU should be re-organised so that it can continue to deliver on its vast array of policies, and make itself more transparent and accountable to the people. Any organisation which increases its membership would re-assess its decision-making procedures. And national governments are supposed to come up with some answers during 2004.
In other words the question is: "What kind of Europe does Ireland want"? This requires consideration of issues like how the role of the European Parliament could be enhanced. Or, as suggested in a report presented this week by John Bruton to the Oireachtas Joint Committee on European Affairs, should all EU citizens directly elect the President of the European Commission? And how should the European Council, where the member-states convene to make the final decisions, be reformed to ensure effective decision-making and democratic legitimacy? What's more, the debate about the future of Europe goes beyond decision-making and democracy. It also involves questions of policy. For example, how could EU member-states co-ordinate better on judicial and internal security matters, whether agreeing on a common arrest warrant, or improving Europe-wide police co-operation? And how should the EU act on the world stage? The European consensus suggests the EU should uphold international law and advocate the benefits of working through multilateral organisations like the UN. And it should take a lead on reaching and implementing international agreements, like the Kyoto treaty, or the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty for nuclear weapons. But should the EU be able to do more, and if so, how?
And then there is politics. The EU no longer makes decisions solely on the basis of what the French and the Germans think. The accession of new states has seen older coalitions wane. Instead, there are different coalitions for different issues, and Ireland has been excellent at coalition building. Moreover, the accession of smaller states from Central and Eastern Europe can only help our policy aims. Finally, if we keep engaging with Europe, Ireland has no reason to fear the future development of EU. We have done well out of our EU membership and will continue to do so, as long as we know what we want.
Daniel Keohane is a research fellow with the Centre for European Reform