In researching and writing this article I have become increasingly alarmed at the potential for abuse of the system proposed by the treaty.
There is specific provision for a military industrial complex written into the treaty with little political control.
I did not fully realize the extent of the Treaties Security and Defense provisions.
Whatever we are told the wording I have used in this article comes directly from the text of the reform treaty. If I can interpret the provisions this way, then so can someone else.
Ireland, Sweden, Austria and Finland – traditionally neutral countries shall be in a new military alliance, which will entail more than just defense.
The Provisions for the Common Security and Defense policy ensures ‘Member states shall make civilian and military capabilities available to the union for the implementation of the common security and defense policy, to contribute to objectives defined by the council’.
That is a military alliance, controlled by an unelected council.
Another provision is that “Member states shall undertake progressively to improve their military capabilities” and that the European Defense Agency shall ‘support defense technology research’ This means increased defense spending. I’d rather see the money spent on schools and hospitals.
The European Defense Agency shall ‘implement any useful measure for strengthening the industrial and technological base of the defense sector’ that is the specific creation of a military industrial complex.
This is the very thing that President Dwight D Eisenhower, in January 1961, warns us about.
To paraphrase Eisenhower, this convergence of a political establishment and a large arms industry is new in the European experience.
We must seriously consider the possible economic, political, and social consequences.
Government must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex.
The potential for the rise of misplaced power exists and will always persist.
We have seen it many times in only the past 90 years - in the span of a single human life.
We must never let this endanger our democratic decisions which have already been denied three times.
Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can ensure liberty and democracy.
So – what will we do with this incredibly powerful military capability?
A common defense policy might sound OK, but Section 1 also makes provision for use of the use of the military outside of the EU ‘in accordance with the principles of the United Nations charter’
– it says nothing about actually going to the UN – so who makes the decision as to how the UN charter is interpreted? As an example we have seen Mr.Bush and Mr. Blair go to war regardless of public and international opposition
Decisions relating to the policy, including those initiating a military mission, will rest with the unelected Council and its unelected President.
Basically, if the Council should decide to intervene in a conflict outside of the borders of the EU – then they may do so - without the need to consult the people or the elected parliament.
Unlike in the US where the people choose, the European President shall not hold a national office and will be selected by a 27 person Council of Ministers.
This Council of Ministers shall not be directly elected by the people.
This is an enormous amount of power and influence to be vested in such a small number of people.
History shows us time and time again that such a convergence of military, economic and political power is very, very dangerous. This is how every single totalitarian state has come into being.
I am not into conspiracies, I believe in the inherent goodness of the majority of people, but who will the next president be - or the one after that? The German people would never have elected Adolph Hitler had they known what he would do.
This treaty once in place will establish a system that has the potential to be abused.
Every time we give too much power to a few unaccountable people, it has been disasterous.
The person tipped to be the first EU President in this way is Tony Blair, former British Prime Minister – who took Britain to war in Iraq in 2003. This was done despite the opposition of the British public, the resignation of his foreign secretary, international opposition, and without a clear UN resolution
The addage of Tacitus still holds true - that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutley.
Again, as always – thanks for reading.
Even if you don’t agree with me – I hope you give some thoughts to the points made
And please let others now about these blogs, podcasts and youtubes.
Citizen Simon - out
Free Blog Counter
The Pope’s TED Talk
16 hours ago