Don’t mention the –

My colleague Jane Merrick has a good report of Anglo-German dialogue at a panel discussion organised by the think-tank Open Europe in London on Thursday last week. It was the usual. The Germans bemoaned British reluctance to pay lip service to the platitudes of good Europeanism. The British came over all Basil Fawlty.

Rudolf Adam, deputy head of mission at the German embassy in London, said:

If you are talking about interests, you are talking about your ambitions and your aspirations. If you ask a German politician, he will probably talk about the federal states of Europe, and a European army … For the last 20 years from Britain, the comment on Europe has been ‘no, no, no – we don’t want this, we don’t want that’. If you want to bring your power and your influence to bear, why does your government not develop a vision of what Europe should be like? … To do that on the basis of a balance of competencies in 2014, you will just see the red lights of the train that has already left the station.

We did not have space in the newspaper to record in full the response of Tobias Ellwood, Parliamentary Private Secretary to the Europe minister David Lidington, who said that Britain had not said “no” to EU enlargement, or on issues of trade and the environment. But he added:

European Army: wonder why we’re saying ‘No, no, no’ to that? There’s a pretty good alliance that’s worked for longer than the EU itself. Therefore creating a European Army… – and if I was really going to be cheeky, I would say well look what happened with the last intervention, who stood up then in that particular case?

Oops.

Recent Posts on Eagle Eye

• Cameron on Gay Marriage Should Make Us Proud
• What Focus Groups Say About Ed Miliband
• Cameron's possibly winning position
• "Clearing the Battlefield"
• UKIP Surges to Record High

• Junius

  It does appear that the French and Germans conveniently forget the lessons of history when the issue of European military integration crops up. To visionaries Louis XIV and Napoleon Bonaparte, a united Europe meant one under French martial control, with Russia tacked on. To visionaries Kaiser Wilhelm and Herr Schicklgruber, a united Europe meant one under German martial control, with Russia tacked on.

  So our new European partners should not be too surprised at the British being less than enthusiastic when the subject of a European force is mooted. After all, but for the English Channel we would have been a region of (a) the French or (b) the German empire (a) centuries or (b) decades ago, with our armed forces an integral part of (a) the French or (b) the German army.

  That is not to say military alliances of convenience should not be mooted, of the sort that occured during the War of the Spanish Succession, the Napoleonic Wars, the first and second world wars, and the more recent intervention in Libya. But as Remembrance Day draws close, our European friends must understand our particular reservations concerning full military integration.

  And as for red lights of trains leaving stations, far too many during the last world war carried defenceless European civilians on one-way trips, as the visionary Rudolf Adam should not need reminding.