Readers of this space were not surprised by the outcome of the French referendum, but may have been impressed by the size of the turnout and margin of defeat for the EU constitution. (We have been saying for a couple of years that creating the USA of Europe is a fatally flawed project.) Here are the reasons for rejection in a nutshell:
1) Jobs, jobs, jobs. It was as though this was 1992 and James Carville was running the "non" campaign: the timing couldnÕt have been better. Overall unemployment at 10% and 22% among the young Ñ with the prospects of greater weakness from further integration and immigration from the 10 new, low wage EU countries, as well as increased competition from China, in the offing;
2) the impending negotiations with Turkey to enter the EU, with 70 million Muslims versus 60 million Frenchmen, many of whom already have a problem with those they call "les beurs," and who cause a lot of crime and discord in France Ñ TurkeyÕs ascension to the EU would arguably permit even greater Muslim immigration to France;
3) a sense that France would not be enhanced, but diminished, in the control of its own affairs Ñ a victim of Anglo-Saxon liberalism in ChiracÕs words Ñ as a poorly performing 60 million player with a weak economy in an entity of 450 million, no matter how Jacques Chirac tried to spin FranceÕs leadership role.
France is a deeply flawed country, but no one doubts that it is a proud country that pursues its interests relentlessly. If the French felt they were running the Common Market, rather than it running them, they would have voted oui in a trice. It is fortunate then for all of us that Chirac made the mistake of calling a referendum, rather than having Parliament ratify the constitution, where it "would have passed with a wide majority."
Nothing sums up better the anti-democratic nature of the EU project better than this: the people of France opposed the constitution in a landslide; the politicians were prepared to pass it in a landslide.
