Toby on Tuesday

'The Four Horsemen..'

Last week I wrote about two wise men, Archbishop Carey and Sir Richard Dearlove, and their concern over Britain’s migration crisis.   Since then Sir Richard, who is the ex-head of MI6, has stepped up his warnings about what he describes as a “terrorist virus”, in particular from Turkey’s imminent visa-free access to the EU which he describes as “like storing gasoline next to the fire one is trying to extinguish.”   Even the European Commission in a leaked document has spoken of “increased mobility into the Schengen area of criminals and terrorists who are citizens of Turkey, or who are foreigners based in Turkey.”   It has also acknowledged that the Turkish mafia, which traffics vast volumes of drugs, sex slaves, illegal firearms and refugees into Europe will enjoy “direct territorial expansion into the EU.”   Yet despite all this, the European Commission is hell-bent on its policy for Turkey and other desperately unstable countries.

 

Now the “Remain” camp has rightly questioned what a post-Brexit Britain would look like?   The answer is simple – we would become a normal country again with control of our own borders, we would resume our membership of the World Trade Organisation and the European Free Trade Association, we would remain in the European Economic Area and use some of the new funds released to strengthen our commitment to NATO.   We would aim to trade and live well with all other countries, inside and outside the EU, especially our friends and allies in the global Commonwealth.   And we would reclaim much of the sovereignty lost since 1973.   But equally, the “Leave” camp is entitled to question what a post-“Remain” Britain would look like?   Here, there are two crucial reports that anyone serious about our country needs to study.   The first of these, issued on 22nd June, 2015, is called The Five Presidents’ Report.   It appears over the names of the EU’s five Presidents – President of the European Commission Jean-Claude Juncker, President of the Euro Summit Donald Tusk, President of the Eurogroup Jeroen Dijsselbloem, President of the European Central Bank Mario Draghi and President of the European Parliament Martin Schultz.   And in essence the report lays out the EU’s strategy for a centralised United States of Europe by 2025.   In language all-too familiar to Euro watchers, the “convergence process should be made more binding through a set of common high-level standards that would be defined in EU legislation.”   Because the Lisbon Treaty is self-amending, a new treaty would not be needed before the creation of this centralised superstate that will subsume Britain should we vote to “Remain.”

 

And the second report, not due to be published until after 23rd June but a draft of which has leaked out, is a German Government White Paper on European security and defence as an alternative to existing NATO system.   It outlines the steps for co-ordination of Europe’s national militaries with permanent co-operation under common structures.   It calls for “the use of all possibilities” available under the Lisbon Treaty’s proposals for a defence union.   It calls for establishing deep co-operation between willing member states, the creation of joint civil-military headquarters for EU operations, a council of defence ministers and better co-ordination of the production and sharing of military equipment.  In the words of Roderich Kiesewetter, a Bundestag foreign affairs committee member, “The creation of a European army is a long way off, but it is a strategic necessity to implement important steps to pave the way towards it now.”   In late June a foreign and security strategy paper will be presented to the European Council.   And on 6th May the European Court of Justice ruled that the European Commission had the legal right to punish any employee who might “damage the institution’s image and reputation”, thereby supressing all freedom of speech within the EU system.   Recently Boris Johnson got into very hot water for language he used in what was really a plea for internationalism and not supranationalism in Europe.   But these two reports make one wonder whether he might just have had a point after all.

 

On 3rd February, David Cameron declared to the House of Commons, “I am not arguing – and I will never argue – that Britain couldn’t survive outside the European Union.   We are the fifth largest economy in the world.   The biggest defence player in Europe with one of the most extensive and influential diplomatic networks on the planet....I rule nothing out.”   Since then, and after his failed “renegotiation”, he has threatened us with war, jihad, President Putin and no doubt soon a plague of rats and the four horsemen of the apocalypse, should we dare to vote “Leave”.   Something must have changed and I suspect that it is his dawning realisation that Britain is being swept up against our will into an aggressive superstate called Europe and he has decided to go along with it.   Even though the security case for Brexit, vividly described by Sir Richard Dearlove, is now compelling, our own vain Prime Minister is so fixated on his cosy telephone conversations with President Obama and Chancellor Merkel that he is prepared to sacrifice our country just so that they can run on for a little longer.   The British people might just have something to say about that on 23rd June!

 

Until next Tuesday!

 

Toby