A unified Nordic outside the EU

It is the EU opponent, law professor and EU parliamentarian Ole Krarup who claims that Denmark and Sweden can get into a situation where they can not continue as members of the EU. He elaborates on this in the book “Europe to where? – Four visions for the future of Europe ”. It was released earlier this week.

Ole Krarup has a long tenure as a member of the European Parliament and has helped give the political elite in Denmark two stinging defeats in referendums.

- Referendums in Denmark cost political lives. This is an important reason why I believe that new defeats for a Danish government will mean that Denmark withdraws from the EU, Ole Krarup tells Ny Tid.

Both the bourgeois Poul Schlüter and the Social Democrat Poul Nyrup Rasmussen had to step down as a result of a majority of Danes saying no to their desire to let Denmark become a more loyal EU member.

Strong resistance

Poul Krarup envisions that the popular Danish opposition to the new constitution is so strong that Denmark must withdraw completely from the EU. He also sees clear trends in Sweden where popular resistance is increasing and in many ways resembles Danish skepticism.

- With Denmark and Sweden outside the EU, we will again have the opportunity to develop cooperation between Denmark, Sweden, Norway and the West Nordic areas. Later, it is conceivable that both the Baltic countries and Finland will see the advantage of being part of a Nordic bloc that can cooperate with the EU or be in opposition to the EU – whichever.

Poul Krarup has a number of arguments that the EU will not survive very many years – at least as the EU is built today. These include:

• Lack of democratic control options

An old and well-known problem in the EU. It is well known that the EU system is very complicated and difficult for ordinary citizens to keep track of. The EU's "democratic deficit" has been debated for many years, but a number of reforms in recent years have failed to address the problem. Reforms that have given the elected representatives in the European Parliament more power, an EU ombudsman has been introduced, a number of decisions have been made on more transparency and better control of the budget. These reforms have not done enough to correct the democratic deficit. Poul Krarup says that today there is a broad perception that democratization is an inalienable condition for the EU project to survive in the long term.

• Lack of efficiency

The EU's gigantic legislative project ("aquis communautaire") has been important in connection with the harmonization of the laws in the member states. Poul Krarup emphasizes that this legislation can only be assessed on the basis of whether the laws are implemented in the member countries. This requires that member states have a system that ensures that the law is implemented. Experience shows that it takes a long time, and with ten new member states that have not had many years to build a democratic system, it is unlikely that efficiency will increase in the future.

• EU police and judiciary

This has been one of the most important projects in recent years. The constitutional proposal shall establish an "area of ​​freedom, security and justice". The further development of this area in the long run means a conflict between the national legal systems and the common European system. With this, we will have a difficult debate about how society should treat its deviants, what should be punished and how one punishes.

• Common foreign and security policy

The EU's "Common Foreign and Security Policy" (CFSP) has been presented as one of the pillars of future cooperation since the Maastricht Treaty. The collaboration is today characterized by deep division. This division became clear in connection with the United Kingdom, together with Denmark, Spain and a number of other EU countries, choosing to support the US attack on Iraq in March 2003. This took place in open conflict with the EU's two other superpowers, Germany and France. The development has since been that the three major EU countries Germany, France and Great Britain will lead a military build-up in close "understanding" with the United States and the American war on terror. This project shows that the US and EU powers have a common interest in exercising decisive control over geopolitical developments. Poul Krarup points out that this is in direct conflict with the ideological dream that the EU's security policy should be a counterweight to US dominance.

• EU Monetary Union

The requirements of the EURO system for the members of the EU's Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) are a consequence of the fact that this project is a community of monetary destiny. One of the key requirements in this co-operation is the Stability Pact, which states, among other things, that member countries are not allowed to have a budget deficit of more than three per cent of the country's gross domestic product. In the autumn of 2003, it became clear that the heavyweights in the cooperation between Germany and France had broken the three percent rule. The case has now been sent to the European Court of Justice, where the EU Council of Ministers will answer that the two countries have not followed the rules. The fundamental problem here is that the availability of public budgets is a central part of national processes. The Stability Pact gives the EU the opportunity to intervene in this process

• External contradictions

In addition to the internal contradictions, there are a number of external areas that will create difficulties for the EU. Here is the different economic distribution that characterizes the world. In a global picture, this is difficult enough to find solutions to. In addition, the EU struggles with the fact that there are a number of former colonial powers among the member states that still have close links with their former colonies.

Serious conflicts

- No matter how one looks at this, there are opportunities for serious conflicts between the EU and the previously colonized countries. These conflicts will also contribute to creating serious internal disagreements in the EU, says Ole Krarup.

Ole Krarup believes that these areas of conflict, individually or together, will create divisions in the EU in the future. He doesn't want to date when the split will come, but he believes that they are so obvious in the terrain that they will become visible over the next months and years.

Ole Krarup says that for Denmark, the country may have to settle with itself during this year or in 2005.

- I believe that there is much to suggest that Denmark will be the first country to leave the EU. The Danes together with the Swedes are the most EU-skeptical. The Danish skepticism has meant that Denmark has been given four exceptions in its union obligations – this applies to the Euro currency, the Union citizenship, the Union military and the EU police and judiciary. The Danes have also twice said no in referendums in the last ten years.

- But, emphasizes Ole Krarup, there are two important factors that actualize that Denmark will leave the EU.

- The new draft constitution opens up for the first time that an EU country can opt out again. That is not possible today. The second is whether the exceptions that Denmark has today can be reconciled with the new constitution at all. In other words, Denmark must remove the exceptions, or opt out altogether.

A Nordic block

Ole Krarup believes that Nordic co-operation offers great opportunities for developing a political counterbalance to the EU. He admits that especially Danish and Swedish top politicians reject the idea today, but believes that this is largely based on the fact that it has been impossible to exit the EU cooperation if one has entered first.

Krarup points out that the Nordic countries have a social system that is very similar to common traditions, history and languages.

- This has helped to lay the foundation for a number of joint Nordic projects. Our common Nordic history is no less bloodthirsty than German-French history is. But the Nordic countries have developed in the last 150 years in a direction where war between the countries is more unlikely than ever.

- It is politically impossible to go to war between the Nordic countries. The main reason for this lies in the way the Nordic countries have chosen to co-operate. The co-operation is not based on supranationality where there are external ties that force the countries together. On the other hand, the Nordic countries have managed over many decades to build a co-operation that today encompasses almost all levels of society, Krarup points out.

Ole Krarup believes that the strength of Nordic cooperation lies primarily in the fact that this has been developed over time in a so-called Nordic cooperation model that is not based on the cooperation being managed from above. It is far less formalistic and significantly more transparent compared to the EU system.

Good results

Krarup disagrees with those who believe that Nordic cooperation lacks the momentum the EU should have.

- Nordic co-operation has a solid popular base in the region. For many decades, a community of law has been steadily developed in the Nordic countries. In recent times, the Nordic countries have implemented the Nordic Labor Market Union, the Social Convention, the Nordic Passport Union and the Language Convention. All these co-ordinations have given us a well-functioning common Nordic labor market where the inhabitants of the Nordic countries can take jobs and educations in the other countries. This co-operation is considerably simpler and more effective than the EU's internal market.

Ole Krarup also believes that the 40-year-old Nordic passport union is a brilliant example of how easy it can be done. The Nordic Passport Union and the EU's Amsterdam Treaty have the same goal – to give citizens the opportunity to travel between member states without passport control.

- While the Nordic passport union is based on a legal text that takes under two pages and is otherwise administered with simple and straightforward systems, the situation is different in the EU. In order to be able to implement what the Nordic region has managed without extensive bureaucracy for 40 years, the EU has built up the Schengen system, which consists of a difficult treaty text with explanatory texts that take several hundred pages. In addition, the EU needs the SIS monitoring and control system.

Should be further developed

Law professor Krarup believes that Nordic cooperation has shown a rare ability to find simple and good collaboration solutions. He believes that a unified Nordic outside the EU has great opportunities to build up a much more extensive cooperation than we have so far.

- The Nordic countries can coordinate their foreign and security policy. The Nordic efforts for world peace through the UN are well known, and we have good opportunities to develop this work further. We have especially seen that Norway has been given a role as a mediator in a number of difficult conflicts around the world. Norway has been given this role because the country is outside the EU and can act as an independently rich western country. The Norwegian experience from mediations in countries such as Sri Lanka, the Middle East, Sudan and Columbia is a good example for Sweden and Denmark. But these two countries can not act in this independent brokering role as members of the EU, says Ole Krarup.

COOPERATION

Ole Krarup believes that future cooperation between the Nordic countries and the EU may be based on several alternatives, but that EFTA may be a place where the countries can meet.

- Regardless of which form we choose, the forthcoming negotiations on a Nordic future outside the EU must be based on the two blocs – the Nordic countries and the EU – being parties in a trade policy cooperation that meets the interests of both parties. The EU will demand its share, but the Nordic region must stand firm in the areas that are important for maintaining the Nordic model. But most important of all is that we regain our political freedom of action in relation to the Nordic region, Europe and the world, says Ole Krarup.