The case for Common European Defence

Our student John Smith argues that the EU could replace the United States as the world’s military superpower, but it must start to cooperate more closely in areas that were hitherto left to individual member states.

The ultimate aim of defence policy is to provide a country’s population with a feeling of security from external harm. There is an increasing need for a common defence of Europe, due to the effects of globalisation and rising global tensions. Integrationists have longed for this since their first attempt to create a single European Army in 1954, since it represents the pinnacle of political integration in which defence becomes a shared competence. Before I go any further I want to make it clear that I am not advocating for a single European Army, rather I am advocating for much closer cooperation on defence policy.

Photo via wikimedia commons – (c) Arno Mikkor

Continue reading “The case for Common European Defence”

Advertisements

Professor Amelia Hadfield’s response and corrections to Daily Mail article

In response to a Daily Mail article entitled ‘Students afraid of being marked down if they support Brexit in essays: Some undergraduates say they fear debate being ‘shut down’ by pro-Remain lecturers, published both online and in hard print on Monday 30th October, Professor Amelia Hadfield has written the following letter for the attention of the Daily Mail Editorial Board. The article primarily focused on concerns from select students at Universities relating to the impartiality of teaching on Brexit; but also included a sub-feature on the Jean Monnet Chair and the recent essay competition run by the Centre for European Studies (CEFEUS) at Canterbury Christ Church University. The following is a copy of the letter submitted at 13:00 today:

Dear Sir,

I’m delighted to correct a few points from today’s Mail Online article by Eleanor Harding and Tom Witherow.

First, the Jean Monnet structure. This is an international mark of distinction for excellence in teaching, awarded to academics the world over who engage in high-quality, innovative and critical teaching. Its objectives “promote excellence in teaching and research in the field of European Union studies worldwide” both on EU issues as well as the study of Europe in its entirety.  

Jean Monnet scholars are therefore responsible for promoting world-class teaching and research on Europe, objectively and analytically. Not for promoting the EU, or attitudes for or against it. Our goal is pedagogic, not polemic. We teach our students to think, write and speak intelligently on the basis of fact, rather than fiction, using evidence, rather than emotion.   

Second, our 2017 Blog Competition was open to all our incoming Freshers, and due to its success, Honours students. There was absolutely no pro-EU bias in the conditions. Students were encouraged to write on ANY aspect of European democracy, migration, security, identity, economics or Brexit-EU relations. Of the 12 winners, 4 wrote on Brexit, 3 on European identity, 2 on economic and fiscal matters, 2 on Austria and Spain, and 1 one foreign policy. Hardly a pro-EU outpouring. Indeed, the blogs reflects students’ ideas on the most salient issue of their generation. The awards were therefore made on the basis of insight and appraisal, whatever the student’s attitude to/against Europe.

Finally, students have a perfect right, and one enshrined in law, to express their opinion, whether they support or oppose EU integration, or Brexit itself. Jean Monnet structures are a key part of encouraging students to think critically and creatively about future UK-EU relations.

Best wishes

Professor Amelia Hadfield

Jean Monnet Chair in European Foreign Affairs, Director of the Centre for European Studies 

Suspending One’s Disbelief: MEP Richard Ashworth and the Tribulations of Voting According to Conscience

The team of the CCCU Centre for European Studies – Director Prof Amelia Hadfield, Graduate Coordinator Noora Virtannen and Undergraduate Coordinate Christian Turner – analyse and comment on the suspension of Conservative MEP Richard Ashworth from party whip.

On Tuesday 3rd October 2017, a resolution was put forward by Guy Verhofstadt, the European Parliament’s representative on Brexit, that the negotiations surrounding Britain’s departure from the European Union were not yet advanced enough to justify moving onto Phase Two of the discussions: namely negotiating the future relationship between the two parties.

The non-bidding motion was comfortably passed by 557 votes to 92, with 27 abstentions. Of the 557 MEPs to vote for the motion, 26 were from the United Kingdom. Within this group of 26 UK MEPs, 18 were Labour, 3 Green, 1 Liberal Democrat, 1 Sinn Fein, 1 Plaid Cymru and finally, 2 from the Conservatives who sit within the ECR (European Conservative and Reforms Group). Four of these MPs represent the South East of England, including Labour’s newly selected John Howarth, who replaced Anneliese Dodds over the summer, and  Richard Ashworth, who has served in the ECR since 2009, and briefly led the Conservatives in the European Parliament itself between 2012-13.

Conservative MEP Richard Ashwort | image via http://www.richardashworth.org

On Sunday 8th October, it emerged that Ashworth (who represents 9 counties as part of the South East) and his party colleague, Julie Girling (South West), had the Tory party whip withdrawn after the vote. The removal of the party whip means that for the duration of their suspension, Ashworth and Girling will not be considered members of the Conservative Party, and therefore technically sit as independents. In addition, they will lose access to the party machinery, related to media, staff and funding, and in extreme cases, can be a cause to be deselected for future elections. Dan Dalton, the Conservative Party Chief Whip in the European Parliament, wrote to the pair that the reasons for the suspension were as follows:

“The Brexit negotiations are the most important negotiations our country faces and reaching a new partnership with the European Union is in the interests of both the UK and the EU.  The resolution by the European parliament sought to delay progress in the negotiations between the UK and the EU by holding back talks on the future relationship. Given the seriousness of this issue I am suspending the Conservative whip from you until further notice.” (The Guardian, October 2017)

Mr Ashworth responded by insisting that this was ‘not a vote against Brexit (nor) a vote to derail or obstruct negotiations’. He added that the negotiations ‘need to urgently move on to trade… however, it is my view that we have not yet made sufficient progress on phase one’.

Continue reading “Suspending One’s Disbelief: MEP Richard Ashworth and the Tribulations of Voting According to Conscience”

How can our local businesses make a success of Brexit?

Noora Virtanen, Graduate Coordinator of the Centre for European Studies (CEFEUS) at Canterbury Christ Church University, reflects on the fall of Southern Salads and explains how findings from the latest CEFEUS report can help to mitigate the economic impact of Brexit on Kent.

The BBC reported yesterday that Southern Salad, based in Tonbridge, would be making more than 250 people redundant following the pound’s devaluation since the EU Referendum. According to the company’s administrators, the business had become unsustainable as “the sudden decline in sterling was not foreseen by the company”, which eventually placed a severe strain on their cash-flow.

The recent report ‘Kent and Medway: Making a Success of Brexit: A Sectoral Appraisal of SMEs and the Rural Economy’ produced by the Centre for European Studies (CEFEUS), one of three reports published so far, indicated similar concerns for these sectors. While overall business confidence improved since late 2016, small businesses face challenges on both domestically and in terms of the future relationship with the European Union – for instance, 64.5% of businesses in the UK have seen an increase in operating costs stemming from fuel costs, the weaker pound and inflationary pressures.

Continue reading “How can our local businesses make a success of Brexit?”

Mayors Going Global: The Curious Case of Brexit

Max Stafford is a PhD candidate in Politics and International Relations at Canterbury Christ Church University. His doctoral research looks at the leadership of mayors in London, New York City and Amsterdam.

It is not new, these days, to talk of mayors and the irony of their playing a role in global issues, despite being local leaders. These issues include climate change, migration and security. However, within the context of the UK, mayors are also managing to play a vital role in the foreign policy issue of the day – Brexit. As I mentioned in an earlier blog post, mayors’ increasing strategic involvement with issues previously assumed to be reserved to national or global-level policymaking raises the well-rehearsed concept of place-based leadership and its future in relation to local political leaders. But who are these mayors and what are they actually doing about Brexit?

  The most vocal mayor on this topic so far has been the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan. Though only early in his first term (having been elected in May 2016), Khan has put effort into casting his mayoralty in an internationalist perspective. Faced with an opponent (Conservative, Zac Goldsmith) whose campaign was the recipient of allegations of “dog-whistle” politics and racism, Khan spent much of his 2016 campaign talking about both the diversity of the city that he aimed to lead and also his own heritage as the child of immigrants. After the June 2016 vote to leave the European Union, he sought to remind both London and the rest of the UK (as well as his European counterparts) that the city was a key player in the global economy.

London mayor Sadiq Khan in the European Parliament | image via europarl.europa.eu

Continue reading “Mayors Going Global: The Curious Case of Brexit”