THAR SHE BLOWS:

Britain vs. the Eurocrats (ANTONY BEEVOR, 5/10/04, NY Times)

The draft version of the European Constitution aims to concentrate far more power in Brussels, the capital of the European Union. It proposes an elected president who would serve for a term of at least a two and a half years. It intends to harmonize legal systems, with standard sentences and Europe-wide rules for basic legal procedures. The Constitution also calls for a Charter of Fundamental Rights covering everything from the workplace to the environment to euthanasia.

The new Constitution also calls for a European foreign minister to direct a joint European foreign policy, and it wants to establish a common defense policy. The is a direct challenge to the primacy of NATO. It reflects the mainly French desire to re-create Europe as a counterbalancing force to the United States, as opposed to the role of traditional ally.

The decision over the Constitution is probably the most important Britain has faced since World War II. I will vote against it for several reasons. Most important, a genuinely democratic constitution, like that of the United States, defines the limits of power of the state over the individual. Yet the draft European Constitution is almost entirely about amassing power for a superstate. It is antidemocratic, dangerous and throughly out of date.

There's the Tories' platform.

Posted by Orrin Judd at May 10, 2004 12:10 PM