Irish Vote Down EU Lisbon Treaty

Irish Voters Say 'No' to EU Integration Pact:
Voters in Ireland, yesterday, considered the recently concluded Lisbon Treaty, a pact that would strengthen the institutions of the European Union and unite the continent's countries' political, commercial, and security endeavors in an unprecedented manner.

Much to the dismay of my brother, Padraig, whose real name, Patrick, has shifted to its Irish counterpart in light of the country's recent surge in attention, citizens of the Emerald Isle voted down the pact, becoming the first of 15 European countries to give the deal a thumbs-down. Ireland, moreover, was the only country in the EU to consider the Lisbon Treaty by way of a country-wide referendum, which, of course, ran the risk of leaving the decision of whether or not to pass the deal up to voters who may not have been informed as to precisely the impact it would have on their lives.

Indeed, media reports (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7453560.stm) have suggested that thousands of voters who ultimately cast their vote 'no', did so largely because of lingering questions regarding what the pact would actually entail. This, of course, was a risk known to policymakers as they took the bold step of selecting the referendum as the method by which Ireland would way in on the EU deal.

Still, while the country is to be commended to leave such a significant decision in the hands of the populace, the result of Thursday's ballot, I believe, is disadvantageous for the island state and evidences that officials must do more to fully educate voters on the finer points of referendum issues.

As my brother shows in a well and passionately written piece below, integration into the European Union has been a boon for the Irish economy, with the country's economy growing at the fastest clip in the continent for the better part of the last 15 years, before slowing last year. Corporate tax reductions, coupled with the unifying facilitation provided by EU membership, drew a wealth of foreign direct investment from countries across the continent into Ireland.

Moreover, lax immigration rules established by the pact, which encourage the movement to Ireland of laborers from sluggish economies in places like Lithuania, Romania, Poland, and other Eastern European coutnries has provided Irish employers with cheap labor, giving them an advantageous way in which to advance their operations. These rules, coupled with the appealingly low corporate tax rate also encourage foreign multinationals to set up shop in the Emerald Isle, bringing with them a swath of well-paying jobs for the country's citizens.

So, why, then, would Irish voters turn down a pact that would seemingly intensify the process that has ushered in a new wave of economic prosperity by a sturdy six point margin. The answer, it seems, lies in the reality that many voters, rightly or wrongly (in fact, often rightly and sometimes wrongly), still vote with their hearts and not their heads. When I visited Ireland last summer, there was a great deal of talk amongst the folks with whom we conversed about the detrimental impact that the flood of Eastern European immigrants was having on Irish culture. There are rumored to be as many as one million Polish migrants alone inside of Ireland, and the total number of those from other countries isn't far behind. While economists seem to agree that enough jobs exist to account for this rush of new labor and that their presence significantly bolsters the domestic economy, it is equally as clear that newcomers do not so quickly drop the cultural practices and customs of their homeland.

My question, however, is how could, and why should, they. Indeed, this seems to be one of the finer points of globalization that its most vehement proponents often miss. As the Jihad v. McWorld dichotomy explores, a zero-sum game, or cultural tug-o-war exists as globalization brings disparate countries ever closer, while different cultures simultaneously cling more tightly than ever to their unique ideals and traditions.

Indeed, as ideas, goods, and even people cross national borders with increasing ease, groups in countries across the world, developed and developing alike, feel threatened that their ability to retain that which makes them independent might be weakening. And don't we see this when we think about parts of the Muslim World, whose violent backlash to the spread of Americana no doubt constitutes a not-so-veiled attempt to strike back against the imposition of Western ideals on their everyday existence. Or how about in Israel, where citizens seem exceedingly willing to open up their country to, and become a more significant part of, an increasingly global economy, while providing Arabs living within their country a more genuine place within the national narrative seems out of the question.

Yet, as the Irish vote on the Lisbon Treaty powerfully demonstrates, the Muslim and Jewish Worlds do not represent the only places in which cultural sensibilities often trump people's desires to open up to a broader world, a reality that extends to the ballot box, as well. In Ireland's Treaty vote, we see people voting down a measure in order to fight something they see as a threat to their culture and their life as an Irish nation in its purest form. Despite the fact that the improved political, economic, and security conditions that the Lisbon Treaty may engender would better enable Irish citizens to celebrate and share their culture, they have given the old '86' to a deal they saw as no good for national heritage.

Padraig, perhaps, if given another shot, those in the Emerald Isle will reconsider (again, see below for my brother's commentary).

Padraig's Piece:
I don't care what Gerry Adams or Declan Ganley says, it's not a good day to be Irish. With this vote, the future of a more powerful and united EU is in jeopardy. The European Commission said today that other nations should continue to ratify the treaty, but Czech President Vaclav Klaus said that ratification could not continue now. Maybe it's just the fact that I do not live in Ireland and in my extensive research I have missed the hidden anti-Irish laws of the EU and the Lisbon Treaty, but I am absolutely baffled that it would be Ireland that would be the bulwark (good word, eh) to the new EU. Ireland. IRELAND!

Ireland is arguably the country that has most benefited from the EU. Remember, it was further integration into the EU and the switch to the Euro that helped unleash the Celtic Tiger, parts one and two. In the 1980s, the economy of the Republic of Ireland was absolutely horrendous. High borrowing, unemployment and tax rates led to the Irish economy becoming the laughing stock of Europe. Soon, however, the economic climate began to improve partly thanks to increased EU investment in the country. Ireland's economy surged and it soon became one of the richest countries in the world and the incomes of its citizens surpassed some of its Western European counterparts And, while Ireland's economy has been susceptible to global economic trends, it remains strong with predictions of 5% growth in 2010.

So, why did the Lisbon Treaty fail to pass. www.lisbonvote.com The only way I can explain the failure is the misrepresentation used by the No campaign. While every major party supported Lisbon, unless you consider Sinn Fein to be a major party, there was a very extensive campaign to paint a message linking the new EU to a New World Order which would take all the power away from the Irish people. Unfortunately, this populist, nationalist, isolationist, etc.-ist has worked and the future of the EU is in limbo.

I leave you with an Irish blessing

May the road rise up to meet you.

May the wind always be at your back.

May the sun shine warm upon your face,

and rains fall soft upon your fields.

And until we meet again,

May God hold you in the palm of His hand.