Research

No and after: options for Europe


Reference:

Whitman, R. G., 2005. No and after: options for Europe. International Affairs, 81 (4), pp. 673-687.

Related documents:

This repository does not currently have the full-text of this item.
You may be able to access a copy if URLs are provided below.

Official URL:

http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2346.2005.00478.x

Abstract

The French and Dutch ‘no’ votes in referendums on the European Union Constitutional Treaty have thrown the EU into turmoil. The messages from both referendums are that public dissatisfaction with European integration is widespread and there is a disjuncture between the views of citizens and those of elites. The original purpose of the process that produced the Constitutional Treaty was to bring the EU closer to its citizens. However, the text that was negotiated was an unwieldy document intended to satisfy diverse requirements but difficult to explain concisely. After the completion of negotiations some governments, for reasons of political expediency, took decisions to hold referendums on the treaty, but the future of The Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe that took three years to complete is now uncertain. Furthermore, member states are divided about whether to press ahead with ratification after the two recent ‘no’ votes. What is the range of alternatives to member states if they wish to salvage the treaty or component parts? Finding a way through this current situation is the task the British government faces as it takes on the EU presidency from 1 July 2005.

Details

Item Type Articles
CreatorsWhitman, R. G.
DOI10.1111/j.1468-2346.2005.00478.x
DepartmentsFaculty of Humanities & Social Sciences > Politics Languages and International Studies
RefereedYes
StatusPublished
ID Code10981

Export

Actions (login required)

View Item