I betchya that IRAQ - rife with neojihadist and neobaathist terror and nagged by lingering ethnic divisions (between Sunni Arabs, Sunni Kurdish, Shia and the Turkmen), and trying democracy for the first time ! - gets a new constitution before EUROPE does!
I THINK IT SERVES OLD EUROPE EFFING RIGHT! And I think the failure of the EU constitution would be a VERY GOOD THING. I think that the nations of Old Europe need a Thatcherite/Reagan revolution more than they need another corrupt layer of bureaucratic socialism.
Here are excerpts from and links to some articles which discuss the causes and implications of the impending collapse of the EU constitution:
(3) The European Commission says it is worried by opinion polls that suggest French voters will reject the EU's constitution in a referendum on 29 May. The latest poll suggests that more than 60% of French adults would vote against the text - the highest level of opposition in an opinion poll yet.
UPDATE: I compared the two (the tottering sociailst nations of Old Europe and New Iraq) for a few OBVIOUS reasons: (1) they are both going through the constitutional process now; (2) OLD Europe was opposed to the Iraq war; (3) and democratization was KEY reason that Bush went to war - and he said so BEFORE THE WAR, IN SEPTEMBER 12, 2002 in his address to the UN General Assembly:
"If all these steps are taken, it will signal a new openness and accountability in Iraq. And it could open the prospect of the United Nations helping to build a government that represents all Iraqis -- a government based on respect for human rights, economic liberty, and internationally supervised elections [emph added]. [...] If we meet our responsibilities, if we overcome this danger, we can arrive at a very different future. The people of Iraq can shake off their captivity. They can one day join a democratic Afghanistan and a democratic Palestine, inspiring reforms throughout the Muslim world.
It is therefore SWEETLY AND SUPREMELY IRONIC that those who were so virulently anti-interventionist (and essentially pro-staus quo in 2002 vis a vis Iraq (IOW: pro-Saddam STAYING in power) are having a tougher time of forging a federal constitution than the LIBERATED Iraqis - whom the Old Europe's elites claimed could NEVER do it!
4 comments:
why compare?
I compared the two (old europe and iraq) for a few OBVIOUS reasons: (1) they are both going through the constitutional process now; (2) OLD europe was opposed to the iraq war; (3) democratization was KEY reason that Bush went to war - and he said so IN SEPTEMBER 12, 2002 in his address to the UN General Assembly:
"If all these steps are taken, it will signal a new openness and accountability in Iraq. And it could open the prospect of the United Nations helping to build a government that represents all Iraqis -- a government based on respect for human rights, economic liberty, and internationally supervised elections [emph added].
[...] If we meet our responsibilities, if we overcome this danger, we can arrive at a very different future. The people of Iraq can shake off their captivity. They can one day join a democratic Afghanistan and a democratic Palestine, inspiring reforms throughout the Muslim world."
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/09/20020912-1.html
It is therefore IRONIC that those who were anti-interventionist visavis Iraq are having a tougher time of forging a federal constitution than the Iraqis - whom they claimed could NEVER do it!
but most european already have national constitutions, or some equivalent...
the more interesting comparison will be the ability for democracy to unite different ethnoreligious groups more successfully than the european babble in brussels... (babel too!)
but most european nations already have national constitutions, or some equivalent...
the more interesting comparison will be the ability for democracy in Iraq to unite different ethnoreligious groups more successfully than the european babble in brussels... (babel too!)
1:46 PM
Post a Comment