This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Perspective

May 28, 2016

The EU is not unity merely for the sake of unity

It was conceived of and is a protector of basic human rights from threats emanating from within and without. By John Claassen

John S. Claassen

Claassen, Professional Corporation

1261 Locust St. C26
Walnut Creek , CA

Email: john@cmpc.law

By John Claassen

The national motto of Belgium ? a country rapidly becoming as well known for its troubled immigrant neighborhoods as for its chocolate, lace and beer ? is the weak "L'Union fait la force" ("Union makes strength"). The motto begs the questions of "Why" and "Who cares?" Proponents of Brexit are asking that question regarding the European Union as the United Kingdom prepares to vote to withdraw from the EU next month.

Belgian history offers no convincing answer to those questions on a national level. In 1830, when Flanders, a Dutch speaking region to the North, and Wallonie, a French speaking region to the South, declared themselves independent from the Netherlands, about the only things the dissenting provinces shared was a border, Catholicism, and the belief that they lacked fair representation in the Netherlands. To Americans, the lack of representation resonates as a rallying cry for independence, but it hasn't been much of a unifying force since then. France's motto, "liberty, fraternity and equality" and Germany's informal motto, "Unity, Justice and Equality" both promise substantially more to their citizens than unity for unity's sake. As for religion, Catholicism has not recently been a particularly unifying force in Europe.

Belgium's internal differences routinely draw more attention than its commonalities. For much of the 19th century, Wallonie was more developed economically. Its proximity to coal helped fuel strong textile and steel industries. Flanders was less developed. Walloons were concerned that their economic strength would be used to support Flanders. Over the last century, roles have been reversed.

Given the linguistic and economic differences between the regions, it comes as little surprise that Belgium's central government has been stripped of much authority, with substantial power being held by the regions.

Belgians, among the more cosmopolitan people in Europe, approach national unity with ambivalence. Belgians do not judge others by Belgian cultural standards, as the French and Germans often do with their cultural standards. They look abroad because almost everything happens abroad. Because of Belgium's openness to immigration, about 12 percent of its 10 million inhabitants are immigrants, with about half coming from other EU countries. There is a rich tradition of immigration of Muslims from Morocco, with Islam now the second most practiced religion (3.5 percent). No strong national tradition and culture rise to keep out foreigners. Yet, no melting pot reduces recent immigrants into a common Belgian identity because there is not much of one. Although many Belgians are open and approachable, Muslims in particular among immigrants face persisting discrimination in housing, education and employment.

As much as their cosmopolitanism is a strength, Belgians' ambivalence towards unity is also a weakness. The lack of coordination among national and local police forces in Belgium after the terrorist attacks in Brussels earlier this year attests to this weakness. The lack of any effective policy for integrating Muslims without discrimination ? a distinctly national role ? also does.

Knowing Belgium's national weakness, international organizations have stepped in to fill the void. The rest of Europe saw no threat in the placement of the EU's executive branch in Brussels. Europe's bureaucracy now presides over much of the rest of Europe from there. NATO resides in Brussels, too. Taking a cue from these international organizations, foreign terrorist organizations have also moved into Belgium. ISIS in particular, has found support in poor immigrant neighborhoods, including Brussel's Molenbeek. These neighborhoods have high unemployment, high crime, and youths who face formidable discrimination.

It is in no small measure ironic that the EU today is as divided as its host country. The Greek financial crisis and Russia's intervention in Ukraine have tested its unity. The ongoing refugee crisis, which has exacerbated divisions among member states, has shaken the EU to its core. The U.K. is not the first of its member countries to ask, "Why" and "Who cares?"

The parallels between Belgium and the EU are real. The EU, like Belgium, is cosmopolitan, open and deeply interested in the world around it by comparison to the larger nation states it interacts with (Russia, China and the U.S.). The EU, like Belgium, historically has been and is politically and economically divided. The EU has been unable to deal well enough with the integration of some immigrant populations.

Still, it should be easier for Europe as a whole to answer the questions than for Belgium. The EU was born of the atrocities of the world wars. Those two monuments to human failure serve as timeless reminders why a go-it-alone approach taken by countries in the past to continent-wide problems carries huge risk. The EU came about to strengthen its member countries against destructive forces from abroad, particularly the Soviet Union. In the aftermath of WWII, American and European leaders alike quickly apprehended that the Soviets were capable of overrunning the continent. The regions in Belgium did not unite from these exigencies.

Thus, Boris Johnson's recent likening of the EU to Nazi Germany is wrong. The EU was conceived of and is a protector of basic human rights from threats emanating from within and without. While the EU is incomparable to Nazi Germany, there is an apt analogy between those sad times and now. In the years leading up to WWII, the U.K. tried, as it is now attempting to do again, to place short-term national interests ahead of its long-term interests and the interests of most states on the continent. Its doing so quickly became known as appeasement.

As Britain considers Brexit, it needs to keep in mind that the EU does not represent unity merely for the sake of unity. Rather, the EU is a critical safeguard of personal freedom and security in an area of the world that is routinely buffeted by storms too powerful for isolated countries to weather on their own.

John Claassen is an attorney working in Oakland. He has lived and studied for two years in Europe, including in Belgium.

#275165


Submit your own column for publication to Diana Bosetti


For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390

Send a letter to the editor:

Email: letters@dailyjournal.com