• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Tony Blair's Nightmare Vision of a European Superstate

    Tony Blair’s interview in yesterday’s Times deserves to be widely read on both sides of the Atlantic. Why? Because it shows that the Eurofederalists’ delusions of grandeur are firmly alive and remain a huge threat not only to British national sovereignty but the future of the transatlantic alliance, especially the Special Relationship. It is also a further demonstration of just how far removed Tony Blair is from political reality and public opinion in the UK, but that’s never stopped him before.

    Blair has always been a European idealist at heart, even though he found out the hard way during the Iraq War that you can’t be both America’s best friend and ally and cosy up to Brussels at the same time. Over Iraq Blair found himself isolated among the ruling elites of Old Europe, especially with Germany and France, and at odds with the leadership of the European Union. He took the right decision to go to war to remove Saddam Hussein but was scorned by the EU establishment. Despite all this, he still remains wedded to the idea that Britain must be at the heart of a federal Europe, and believes that London should be at the forefront of driving the process of further European integration.

    In his interview with The Times, the former prime minister calls for an elected president of the European Union, selected by an electorate of nearly 400 million people, which “would give the EU clear leadership and enormous authority on the world stage.” It is essential for Europe to have “strong, collective leadership and direction.” This is necessary, Blair believes, because “we won’t have the weight and influence a country like Britain needs unless we’re part of that European power as well.”

    Significantly, his grand scheme is all about “power, not peace”, with a muscular Brussels supposedly taking on the rising ’superpower’ in Beijing:

    “In a world in particular in which China is going to become the dominant power of the 21st century, it is sensible for Europe to combine together, to use its collective weight in order to achieve influence. And the rationale for Europe today therefore is about power, not peace.”

    In all but name, Blair is urging the creation of a European superstate, a rival power to both the United States and China, one where national sovereignty is pooled in several key areas, including defence and foreign policy, immigration and organised crime, tax policy, and energy. The foundations for much of this have already been laid by the Treaty of Lisbon, but Blair’s vision takes the European project considerably further, especially in the area of tax harmonisation and defence.

    Blair himself admits that there is little chance of his idea of an elected president being embraced at home at this moment (a position that he no doubt wishes to fill himself), but insists that this is the path that Britain and Europe must ultimately take. And there can be little doubt that his dream of a politically and economically unified EU is shared by many other leaders across Europe who remain wedded to the concept of ever closer union, despite the crisis in the Eurozone, and the irrelevance of Brussels over Libya.

    While Blair’s words may sound like a pipe dream, the defenders of sovereignty and freedom in Britain and across the European continent should remain on their guard. For as we have seen so many times in the past, European national leaders, including in London, have made concession after concession as national sovereignty has been eroded treaty by treaty, overwhelmingly without popular consent. Who would have thought two decades ago that the EU would today have its own diplomatic corps with 7,000 staff and a budget of more than 6 billion pounds, and with the tacit acceptance of a Conservative-led Coalition?

    Tony Blair’s vision for a European superstate is a nightmare for anyone who cares about Britain’s future as a free country governed by its own elected representatives, and must be actively fought by this government and the next, as well as by generations to come. As Lady Thatcher remarked in her final book Statecraft, “that such an unnecessary and irrational project as building a European superstate was ever embarked upon will seem in future years to be perhaps the greatest folly of the modern era.” How right she was, and Blair’s interview today only serves to reinforce the importance of that message.

    Cross-posted from The Telegraph

    Posted in International [slideshow_deploy]

    12 Responses to Tony Blair's Nightmare Vision of a European Superstate

    1. West Texan says:

      Nile could have just as easily said "For as we have seen so many times in the past, [U.S.] leaders … have made concession after concession as [Texas'] sovereignty has been eroded treaty by treaty, overwhelmingly without popular consent. Who would have thought [a limited power federal government could have overreached as far as it did into states' affairs such as social services and entitlements] and with the tacit acceptance of a Conservative-led [republican and blue-dog] Coalition?"

    2. West Texan says:

      Correction: " … as [Texas'] sovereignty has been eroded [federal power grab by federal power grab], overwhelmingly without popular consent."

    3. JimmyZ says:

      The Liberal paradise – a one world government where the Tony Blairs, Barack Obamas and Clintons can finally control their subjects, and ensure that the world's population responds to their superior intellect. A jakcboot awaits any dissenters who hold to that quaint old notion of personal freedom.

      When will the sheep learn that they just aren't smart enough to govern themselves……bitterly clinging to their guns and religion.

    4. Mike O'Grady (D says:

      Spending without regard to getting the best deal for the money is the biggest problem the government has as far as I'm concerned. As a middle class parent, my wife and I agonize over where we need to save so we can send our kids to college as well as save for our retirement. The government apparently does not feel the same way.

      I have a pet peeve regarding Food Stamps here in Michigan. Not only does the Governors budget allocate $3 billion this year ($7 billion for Welfare programs in general), but the money we give to the Food Stamp Program is not even competitively bid as it relates to where a food stamp recipient can spend the money. There are over 9000 stores in Michigan the can process a card, and there's a minimum 85 cents surcharge for each order. The state spent $220 million in March 2011 alone all of it was spent in Retail Establishments. We paid full ticket prices for off the shelf items like soup and diapers!

      What I suggest is that the taxpayers buy up some empty stores, convert them to Membership Only and make 100% of the Food Stamp Customers shop only at these establishments. The stores operate as Non Profits and the intent is to stop the over charges while meeting the needs of the hungry. Taxpayers get the double whammy all the time. The big corporations generally don't pay taxes and neither do the poor. the Middle Class take the brunt of supporting both, and we're tapped out.

      There has to be a better way.

      If you want to see my suggestion, then please go to my CHEAP-FOOD-STAMPS site and take a look.


      A Non Profit Membership store can reduce the costs of goods by 50% easily and save the taxpayers Billions annually. The stores would also ferret out the cheats since they cannot buy goods and sell them for profit. The State saves money that can go to other programs.

    5. John, Staten Island says:

      Already the EU is trying to strong arm Poland into submission because of its prolife laws. It's horrifying to hear about.

    6. Dr. Roger Kotila - N says:

      I agree with Tony Blair regarding the desirability of a federated, united Europe but disagree with his advocacy for have a "President", and disagree with why he wants the European Union to federate even more. Blair wants the EU to have more power.

      Blair is using a discredited political paradigm. He seeks a more powerful European Union in order to participate in the obsolete and dangerous geopolitical game of economic and military power politics. We are supposed to be worried about "competition" with China, etc. But the "competition" model of government, nation against nation, has led to nothing but misery worldwide.

      And what role does Blair see for the United Nations?

      Blair appears unaware of the new global political paradigm entering the world stage. Competition shifts to cooperation. Paranoia about "enemies" shifts to acknowledgment that we are a global family. This new paradigm replaces the global war system with a global peace system. The New Economics rejects the "I win – you lose" value system so destructive to the losers.

      A better reason than Blair's for a fully federated Europe is that it can help integrate with other regional groupings into a democratic world federation as called for by the World Constitution and Parliament Association's "Constitution for the Federation of Earth" (AKA "Earth Constitution). This new world constitution calls for a peaceful integration of the nations and 5 Continental Divisions (Magna Regions) with a democratically elected World Parliament.

      There is no world "President" in the Earth Constitution. Similarly, there is no need for the European Union to have a "President".

      Rather than a "President", the new politcal paradigm in the Earth Constitution calls for a "Presidium" consisting of five members from Parliament, rotating as Chair each year, but with no dictatorial powers as has been granted our U.S. President.

      The days of an all knowing "father figure" to tell us what to do is simply a prescription for more trouble in the world, a continued arms race, spies and super spies in a world of clinical paranoia, and reinforcement of the oligarchical governing system for which we all suffer so greatly.

      How to free ourselves? The Earth Federation Movement under the Earth Constitution replaces the failed United Nations global system with democracy, with cooperation rather than deadly competition, and with a respect for all people, not just one's particular place of birth.

    7. David Thorpe, Hermit says:

      I believe all things happening on Earth can be explained by what we find in the Bible, and what Mr. Blair is advocating here is no different. Don't we all know what this really means?

    8. Pingback: El superestado europeo de Tony Blair: Toda una pesadilla | Heritage Libertad

    9. Casimiro Bocaycay, N says:

      In a recent TV edition of "Hardtalk", Blair was asked why Britain and NATO were not bombing Syria for the same "humanitarian" reasons that they are bombing Libya, Blair came up with a jumble of many words and excuses that came nowhere near answering the question. Folks, if you still trust NATO, the EU, and glib supporters like Blair despite the audacious inconsistency in their treatments of Libya vis a viz Syria, Sudan and Iran, then you'll believe anything.

    10. Pingback: Morning Brief – 06/15/11 « Unspiked Media

    11. Sydney Emmeson U.K says:

      All British politicians since Margaret Thatcher have been PRO European. This attitude is not in the interests of Peace and Prosperity but in the lust for Power and corruption. Politicians of today have no sense of morallity, no interest in this country or its people, only in self-aggrandisement. The likes of Blair, Brown Clegg and Cameron are all chasing the same dream "Ultimate Dictator" of Europe. When are the indigenous people of Great Britain going to realize they are losing thier NATIONAL IDENTITY NEVER TO HAVE it RETURNED.

      • Lbertyed says:

        Well said Sydney, I have the same sentiment about our own corrupt Irish political system.

        They sold the country out….


    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.