The Lisbon Treaty restores Clear Legal Sovereignty to Ireland and 26 other EU nations, thus, among other benefits, greatly reducing the risk of future Wars of Secession, so please vote Yes.
In a Union, Clear Legal Sovereignty matters, because, among other reasons, it greatly reduces the risk of future Wars of Secession. Historically many lives have been lost in the US Civil War, in the Irish War of Independence, in Tibet, in Spain's Basque Country, in Chechnya, and so on, because people eventually tried, successfully or otherwise, to fight their way out of Unions where they had no clearly stated legal right to leave.
By contrast the largely peaceful break-up of the Soviet Union was possible in large part because few supporters of the Union were prepared to fight when every Soviet schoolchild had been taught that Stalin's Constitution guaranteed the right of secession to the 15 Union Republics (unfortunately for many now dead, injured, or bereaved Chechens, Chechnya was not a Union Republic).
President Abraham Lincoln is still widely admired, partly for bloodily but successfully fighting 'to preserve the Union' that is the USA. The Southern secessionists thought it was irrelevant that the US Constitution didn't mention a right to leave, arguing that the fact that they freely joined meant they had an implicit right to leave. Their mistake cost 600,000 American lives.
Perhaps nobody will be prepared to fight now, or even in the far less knowable circumstances of 5 to 50 years' time, 'to preserve the Union' that is the EU, by militarily preventing a Member State from leaving it 'illegally'. This may be so even though such optimistic assumptions have been wrong in previous Unions, and even though it is obviously easier to militarily crush the 'illegal' attempted secession of a small country like Ireland, when this can be portrayed as a cheap price to pay to prevent the setting of a dangerous and 'illegal' precedent that, if allowed to succeed, might one day destroy the Union - if you doubt this, just ask any Basque or Chechen or Tibetan.
But even if there's no actual fighting, the breakup is likely to be far more painful politically and economically for both sides if it is seen by many to be illegal than if it is clearly seen to be legal. And in the meantime the member states are likely to be far better treated by a Union which they are clearly legally entitled to leave, for basically the same reason that an employer has to treat an employee far better than a slave owner has to treat a slave, because the employee is legally entitled to leave, and the slave can only try to run away 'illegally'.
I don't want to withdraw from the EU, but, for reasons made clear in the above paragraphs, I see the clear legal right to do so as absolutely vital in the long run, and I've wanted it for many years.
And therefore, at least to me, it seems vitally important that we vote Yes to the Lisbon Treaty. This is because Article 1, paragraph 58 of the Lisbon Treaty (see Appendix A2 below), for the first time clearly allows a Member State to leave the EU legally ('Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements'). This right to leave is in effect subject only to a need to give up to 2 years' notice. This restores to Ireland and 26 other European Nations the clear legal sovereignty that they lost, mostly unwittingly and involuntarily, as a result of their acceptance of the Maastricht Treaty's apparent commitment to 'continue the process of creating an ever closer union' ( always assuming they hadn't already lost it through some earlier Treaty). Note that the 'ever closer union' language remains there - but once Lisbon creates an explicit right to leave, the 'ever closer union' language clearly becomes a non-binding aspiration, instead of its present status as an apparent license to fight wars 'to preserve the Union' for anybody who feels that way inclined (as Abraham Lincoln once did).
Of course, it is possible that after a No vote some other means will be found to restore clear legal Sovereignty, but I wouldn't count on it, as the Euro-Federalist forces that deprived us of our clear legal Sovereignty at Maastricht (or earlier) may well prevent us from getting another chance to undo their bad work.
Because Lisbon reduces the risk of future wars of secession, I find it strange that Peace is not already being used as a strong selling point for the Yes campaign, especially considering that after the last campaign leading Yes campaigners complained about the lack of strong selling points (as if Peace and Sovereignty were somehow not strong selling points - I suggest some slogans in Appendix B). Instead, weirdly, we have let the No campaign make the largely unchallenged claim that they are the defenders of Peace, and indeed the defenders of our Sovereignty.
I find it strange that No campaigners are allowed get away largely unchallenged with such claims as that Lisbon will conscript Irish people into a European Army to fight future European wars, when the clear legal sovereignty that Lisbon restores is precisely what we need to be able to stay out of such wars, while the continued loss of clear legal sovereignty that will result from a No vote is precisely what history suggests is liable to eventually get us into such wars, either ourselves fighting to leave, or else fighting to prevent others from leaving.
I'm not a Sinn Fein supporter, but I'm well aware that our grandparents and great-grandparents, led by Sinn Fein, fought their way out of the Union that was the United Kingdom. I find it strange that nobody is asking the Sinn Fein leadership why they are acting in a way that increases the risk that one day our children or grandchildren may be forced to fight their way out of the European Union.
Did somebody say something about a second referendum being undemocratic? In other circumstances I might agree. But in this case, I find it totally undemocratic, and indeed unbelievable and insanely perverse, that a few thousand of our No voters (almost all of them supporters of Irish Sovereignty) may deprive Ireland and 26 other nations and 500 million people of the restoration of their clear legal sovereignty (and have already succeeded in delaying it), and may consequently also deprive them of their best chance of avoiding future EU Wars of Secession, seemingly without any of these Irish voters (or anybody else) intending this or realising that this is what they are doing.
I may or may not eventually (see Appendix C) speculate on reasons for that apparent perversity, but I doubt if my somewhat eccentric speculations would be helpful here. If Yes campaigners need to offer reasons for that apparent perversity, they can always try such old reliables as 'obviously it's difficult to say for sure, but some of us think it may have something to do with X', where X can be whatever can be argued to make some sort of sense (if you need a suggestion, I would suggest X= 'the fact that many people are uncomfortable thinking and speaking about unpleasant things like secessionist civil wars' - I don't know whether this is the true reason or not, but it's quite possible that it is).
For personal reasons (see Appendix C), once I've sent out a few relevant e-mails, I will not be taking any further part in the Yes campaign. So I would urge any Yes campaigners who think my argument may be useful to promote it themselves. They might also consider drawing it to the attention of our 26 EU partners - after all, it is also their clear legal Sovereignty, and Peace for their children and grandchildren, that is unwittingly threatened by our No voters, and it might perhaps be useful if their leaders and people let our No voters know how they feel about that. (See Appendix B for some campaigning suggestions).
Jim Goolick (not my real name, see Appendix C), Irish voter, Dublin, September 12, 2009.
For personal reasons (see Appendix C), once I've sent out a few relevant e-mails, I will not be taking any further part in the Yes campaign. So I would urge any Yes campaigners who think my argument may be useful to promote it themselves. They might also consider drawing it to the attention of our 26 EU partners - after all, it is also their clear legal Sovereignty, and Peace for their children and grandchildren, that is unwittingly threatened by our No voters, and it might perhaps be useful if their leaders and people let our No voters know how they feel about that. (See Appendix B for some campaigning suggestions).
Jim Goolick (not my real name, see Appendix C), Irish voter, Dublin, September 12, 2009.
E-mail: jimgoolick@yahoo.com
.
Table of Appendices:
Appendices A: Links and Documents
Appendix A1: Links to Document Full Texts, Campaigns, etc
Appendix A2: Lisbon Treaty, Article 1, paragraph 58
Appendix A3: The resulting new Article 50 of the amended Treaty on European Union (plus Article 49)
Appendix A4: what Ireland's Referendum Commission says
.
Appendix B: Some Suggested Campaigning Material: Suggested slogans and short letters to media, etc
Appendix B1: Suggested slogans
Appendix B2: Suggested short letter which you can send to the Irish media
Appendix B3: Suggested short letter which you can send to the media and/or embassies and/or leaders of other EU countries
.
Appendix C: A note regarding me and my possible future speculations
Appendix A: Links and Documents
Appendix A1: Links to Document Full Texts, Campaigns, etc
- Full Lisbon Treaty texts are at:
http://www.consilium.europa.eu/showPage.aspx?id=1296&lang=en
This is the English language version of the official website of the Council Of The European Union. Most documents are in both .doc and .pdf formats, and some are also in .html format. I recommend .doc as it's easier to search. I've included the most relevant parts in the Appendices A2 and A3 below.
- Ireland's Referendum Commission has its Lisbon Treaty website at:
http://www.lisbontreaty2009.ie/
What it has to say about withdrawal can be found in Section F at:
http://www.lisbontreaty2009.ie/lisbon_treaty_other_proposed_changes.html
(see also Appendix A4 below).
- Links to various Yes Campaigns can be found here:
http://www.voteyes.ie/?gclid=CMLDofy815wCFd4B4wodpFG-LA
especially Ireland for Europe (the main Yes Campaign) at: http://www.irelandforeurope.ie/
and Generation Yes (the main Youth Yes Campaign) at: http://www.generationyes.ie/
(Sorry, I'm not pretending to be neutral, so if you want links to No Campaigns, you can look them up yourself on Google).
Appendix A2: Lisbon Treaty, Article 1, paragraph 58 :
1) The following new Article 49 A shall be inserted:
"Article 49 A
1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.
2. A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union. That agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 188 N(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament.
3. The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.
4. For the purposes of paragraphs 2 and 3, the member of the European Council or of the Council representing the withdrawing Member State shall not participate in the discussions of the European Council or Council or in decisions concerning it.
A qualified majority shall be defined in accordance with Article 205(3)(b) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
5. If a State which has withdrawn from the Union asks to rejoin, its request shall be subject to the procedure referred to in Article 49.".
Appendix A3: The resulting new Article 50 of the amended Treaty on European Union (plus Article 49)
Article 1, paragraph 58 of the Lisbon Treaty (see Appendix A2 above) refers to the insertion of a new Article 49A. After renumbering (in the Annex to the Lisbon Treaty),
Article 49A becomes Article 50 of the consolidated version of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), as amended by the Lisbon Treaty. I've also included Article 49, because it's briefly referred to at the end of Article 50. In summary, Article 50 says that 'Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements', in effect subject only to having to give up to 2 years' notice to try to negotiate a tidy exit. If no agreement is reached after 2 years, the withdrawal happens anyway unless everybody agrees to prolong the negotiations. If it wishes, the departed State can later choose to apply to rejoin in the same way as any other non-member can apply to join (which is set out in Article 49).
Article 49
(ex Article 49 TEU)
Any European State which respects the values referred to in Article 2 and is committed to promoting them may apply to become a member of the Union. The European Parliament and national Parliaments shall be notified of this application. The applicant State shall address its application to the Council, which shall act unanimously after consulting the Commission and after receiving the consent of the European Parliament, which shall act by a majority of its component members. The conditions of eligibility agreed upon by the European Council shall be taken into account.
The conditions of admission and the adjustments to the Treaties on which the Union is founded, which such admission entails, shall be the subject of an agreement between the Member States and the applicant State. This agreement shall be submitted for ratification by all the contracting States in accordance with their respective constitutional requirements.
Article 50
1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.
2. A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union. That agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament.
3. The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.
4. For the purposes of paragraphs 2 and 3, the member of the European Council or of the Council representing the withdrawing Member State shall not participate in the discussions of the European Council or Council or in decisions concerning it.
A qualified majority shall be defined in accordance with Article 238(3)(b) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
5. If a State which has withdrawn from the Union asks to rejoin, its request shall be subject to the procedure referred to in Article 49.
Appendix A4: what Ireland's Referendum Commission says :
Perhaps owing to a scandalous degree of incompetence, our Referendum Commission, as far as I can see, made no mention of the withdrawal provisions in its document to households last time - I still have my copy. That's the main reason why I said nothing last time - I took it for granted the relevant article had been removed (at the time I had no easy access to the Internet to check). I haven't yet received their new household document, but their website has this to say at: http://www.lisbontreaty2009.ie/lisbon_treaty_other_proposed_changes.html
The conditions of admission and the adjustments to the Treaties on which the Union is founded, which such admission entails, shall be the subject of an agreement between the Member States and the applicant State. This agreement shall be submitted for ratification by all the contracting States in accordance with their respective constitutional requirements.
Article 50
1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.
2. A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union. That agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament.
3. The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.
4. For the purposes of paragraphs 2 and 3, the member of the European Council or of the Council representing the withdrawing Member State shall not participate in the discussions of the European Council or Council or in decisions concerning it.
A qualified majority shall be defined in accordance with Article 238(3)(b) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
5. If a State which has withdrawn from the Union asks to rejoin, its request shall be subject to the procedure referred to in Article 49.
Appendix A4: what Ireland's Referendum Commission says :
Perhaps owing to a scandalous degree of incompetence, our Referendum Commission, as far as I can see, made no mention of the withdrawal provisions in its document to households last time - I still have my copy. That's the main reason why I said nothing last time - I took it for granted the relevant article had been removed (at the time I had no easy access to the Internet to check). I haven't yet received their new household document, but their website has this to say at: http://www.lisbontreaty2009.ie/lisbon_treaty_other_proposed_changes.html
F. Leaving the EU
At present, there are no specific arrangements for withdrawing from membership of the EU. The Lisbon Treaty provides a process for withdrawal.
At present, there are no specific arrangements for withdrawing from membership of the EU. The Lisbon Treaty provides a process for withdrawal.
This is clearly an improvement on last time, though it fails to mention that without Lisbon withdrawal would currently violate the apparent commitment under the Maastricht Treaty (and perhaps earlier Treaties) to 'continue the process of creating an ever closer union'.
Incidentally, once this referendum is over, the Dail might perhaps find it useful to inquire into the Referendum Commission's deplorable failings in this area, especially in the first referendum.
Incidentally, once this referendum is over, the Dail might perhaps find it useful to inquire into the Referendum Commission's deplorable failings in this area, especially in the first referendum.
Appendix B: Some Suggested Campaigning Material: Suggested slogans and short letters to media, etc
Appendix B1: Suggested slogans:
Appendix B1: Suggested slogans:
- Peace matters - Vote Yes
- Preventing future EU Wars of Secession matters - Vote Yes
- Don't make our children have to fight their way out of the EU - Vote Yes
- Don't force our children to fight in wars to preserve the EU - Vote Yes
- Our grandparents had to fight their way out of the UK. Don't make our children have to fight their way out of the EU - Vote Yes
- Sovereignty matters - Vote Yes
- Clear Legal Sovereignty matters - Vote Yes
- Restore our Clear Legal Sovereignty - Vote Yes
- Restore the Clear Legal Sovereignty of Ireland and 26 Other European Nations - Vote Yes
- Lisbon restores Clear Legal Sovereignty to Ireland and 26 other EU nations, thus greatly reducing the risk of future EU Wars of Secession - Vote Yes
- We don't want to leave the EU, but we and our children need the clear unarguable right to do so - Vote Yes
Appendix B2: Suggested short letter which you can send to the Irish media
Sir/Madam,
By for the first time clearly allowing Member States to leave the EU legally, Article 1, Paragraph 58 of the Lisbon Treaty restores Clear Legal Sovereignty to Ireland and 26 other EU nations, thus, among other advantages, greatly reducing the risk of future EU Wars of Secession. So I urge your readers to please vote Yes.
Further details can be found at http://jimgoolick001.blogspot.com/2009/09/lisbon-vote-yes-for-sovereignty-and.html (actually, at least for the time being, you only need to type in http://jimgoolick001.blogspot.com/ ).
Yours, etc
(Insert your Name and Address)
Appendix B3: Suggested short letter which you can send to the media and/or embassies and/or leaders of other EU countries
Sir/Madam,
By for the first time clearly allowing Member States to leave the EU legally, Article 1, Paragraph 58 of the Lisbon Treaty restores Clear Legal Sovereignty to your country and 26 other EU nations, thus, among other advantages, greatly reducing the risk of future EU Wars of Secession. Irish voters vote on this Treaty on October 2, 2009. So I urge your citizens and leaders to politely and peacefully let Irish voters know how much you value the restoration of your country's Clear Legal Sovereignty, and how important it is to minimize the risk of your children and grandchildren getting bereaved or injured or killed in future EU Wars of Secession, and consequently how important you feel it is that Irish voters should vote Yes to Lisbon.
Further details can be found at http://jimgoolick001.blogspot.com/2009/09/lisbon-vote-yes-for-sovereignty-and.html (actually, at least for the time being, you only need to type in http://jimgoolick001.blogspot.com/ ).
Sir/Madam,
By for the first time clearly allowing Member States to leave the EU legally, Article 1, Paragraph 58 of the Lisbon Treaty restores Clear Legal Sovereignty to Ireland and 26 other EU nations, thus, among other advantages, greatly reducing the risk of future EU Wars of Secession. So I urge your readers to please vote Yes.
Further details can be found at http://jimgoolick001.blogspot.com/2009/09/lisbon-vote-yes-for-sovereignty-and.html (actually, at least for the time being, you only need to type in http://jimgoolick001.blogspot.com/ ).
Yours, etc
(Insert your Name and Address)
Appendix B3: Suggested short letter which you can send to the media and/or embassies and/or leaders of other EU countries
Sir/Madam,
By for the first time clearly allowing Member States to leave the EU legally, Article 1, Paragraph 58 of the Lisbon Treaty restores Clear Legal Sovereignty to your country and 26 other EU nations, thus, among other advantages, greatly reducing the risk of future EU Wars of Secession. Irish voters vote on this Treaty on October 2, 2009. So I urge your citizens and leaders to politely and peacefully let Irish voters know how much you value the restoration of your country's Clear Legal Sovereignty, and how important it is to minimize the risk of your children and grandchildren getting bereaved or injured or killed in future EU Wars of Secession, and consequently how important you feel it is that Irish voters should vote Yes to Lisbon.
Further details can be found at http://jimgoolick001.blogspot.com/2009/09/lisbon-vote-yes-for-sovereignty-and.html (actually, at least for the time being, you only need to type in http://jimgoolick001.blogspot.com/ ).
Yours, etc
(Insert your Name and Address)
Appendix C: A note regarding me and my possible future speculations
(Insert your Name and Address)
Appendix C: A note regarding me and my possible future speculations
I mentioned in the above main article how strange and indeed perverse I found our current situation, and that I may or may not eventually speculate on reasons for that apparent perversity, but that I doubted if my somewhat eccentric speculations would be helpful here in this campaign. I half-hope (and half-dread) to eventually write a book about this and other even stranger instances of apparent perversity in our world. But don't hold your breath, as I don't expect it to be ready any time soon, and it may never be ready, for several reasons, including, among others, that I'm a chronic procrastinator, that I've no assistance, and that I fear that, if successful, it may be so controversial as to be dangerous to me and to others associated with it, which is not much of an incentive for me to write it, nor for others to publish it (though Internet publication may partly get around that last problem). Indeed, due to this danger, I probably wouldn't be thinking of writing this book, except that I'm not really sure that I have any moral right to refuse to make the information which it will contain available to other people. The possible danger means that it will have to be produced under a pen-name. And since it will probably need all the publicity it can get, it may need to benefit from any possible name recognition that I may (or may not) gain through my present endeavour - so quite possibly it will have to be published under the same pen-name as I'm using now (Jim Goolick, E-mail: jimgoolick@yahoo.com ), which is the main reason why I'm using a pen-name here in the first place. And this need for anonymity is one of the main reasons why, once I've sent out a few relevant e-mails, I plan to take no further part in this campaign, thus leaving it up to the rest of you to use my ideas in the Yes campaign if you deem them useful.
