The Gaming Den

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Lisbon

So, this is a set of amendments and such to the various EU treaties that have gone down over the year. The idea is that this treaty will combine them into one comprehensive document. It also has a charter of fundamental rights (which is important) and a whole bunch of administrative stuff (which will be important in the future).

Thus far, every EU nation has ratified the treaty (Britain and Poland had opt-outs on the charter of rights) except the Czech Republic. My questions are:

1) What are the arguments used in the Czech Republic against ratification?
2) What were the arguments used in Britain and Poland against the charter of fundamental rights?
3) Is the overall political climate in the EU moving towards empowerment of the EU or of individual states?

Right, thanks in advance for any answers that I may receive. I know quite a bit about American politics, but next to nothing about Europe.

1) The argument in the Czech Republic is that we don't actually have a government. The Parliament went down on a no-confidence vote last February and the elections to replace them were canceled (seriously). We're not really a Republic right now, so much as a Bohemian and Moravian Protectorate.

The only person left in the government is the President, who currently has no checks on his powers at all. He is against the EU because he is a Euroskeptic, a Global Warming Denier, and Probably a KGB Spy. When he was allowed to negotiate on behalf of the EU to end the Ukrainian Gas Crisis this year, his response was "I don't care if Poles die."

What he actually claims is that the Lisbon treaty might rescind the Beneš Declaration, which was the order at the end of World War 2 that Czechoslovakia was taking all the land that the Reich had settled Germans on during the Nazi occupation and giving it to Slavs (including, by the way, land that had been owned by Sudentendeutsch before World War 2 even started). And so he claims he won't sign it until the treaty is amended to include language that specifically exempts those Czechoslovak atrocities from human rights violation charges.

The thing is: that's fucking absurd. First of all, if that was actually a concern of his, he could have brought it up at any time in the last decade or so, before countries got around to signing the damn thing. Because if you change it now, everyone would have to run it by their parliaments again. Which is obviously Klaus' plan, because he sure as fuck has no intention of signing it when it comes around a second time either. Secondly, the winners of World War 2 are not ever going to be made to pay a Eurocent in restitution to Germany for crimes during World War 2. Seriously, even Germany isn't asking anyone to do that. Rounding up the Sudetendeutsch and expelling them from the country at gun point was a dick move and like a hundred thousand people died during forced marches into Austria, but it's World War Fucking 2 and the Germans killed 30 million Slavs. No one gives a fuck. In fact, before Klaus brought it up, people weren't even taught the history of that in school, because compared to all the atrocities that happened in that period it's seriously a minor point that no one cares about.

Basically, Klaus is enjoying his time as dictator of Czech Republic by doing everything he can to sabotage the European Union. He spends his time chillin like a villain with Dick Cheney trying to figure out ways to ruin western civilization. Being a dick about signing the EU declaration of human rights is only part of that.

-Username17

Thanks.

So, what's the popular support on this Klaus guy look like? Who are the key conservative (which I assume he is) demographics? What are they key liberal demographics? What is the expected result of the next parliamentary election, and are they expected to ratify the treaty?

Also, can Klaus refuse to sign their ratification if it goes through, and when is he up for re-election?

Sorry about the barrage of queries.

Klaus' term ends in 2013. He is blocked by term limits from going any farther. Currently, we're supposed to have Parliamentary elections this coming May - but we were also supposed to have Elections in October (canceled) and June (delayed until October and then canceled). So I'm not holding my breath.

It looks like this is a plan to help the UK Conservatives win election and scuttle the Lisbon accords altogether. That's what most pundits think, because frankly they can't understand how anything in European politics could be about anything other than the UK, Germany, France, or Italy. In truth, Klaus doesn't give a fuck about the UK, because his actual allies are the reactionaries in the United States and Russia. He's just hurting Europe on general principals - like when he scuttled the gas negotiations in January and praised Israeli attacks on Palestine.

Honestly, I don't really think there's a resolution that involves the Czech Republic continuing to exist. But that's OK, because the Czechs don't usually keep countries for very long. The longest there has ever been a country here is 23 years - from when Czechoslovakia was liberated by the Soviet Union in 1945 until its liberty was declared void by an invasion by the Soviet Union in 1968. The Czech Republic was created by an unconstitutional decree against popular opinion in 1993 by Mečiar of the Slovak Nazi Party and Vaclav Klaus of the aptly named ODS party. Vladimir Mečiar is never going to be minister of anything anymore because of his low popularity and personal scandals (but as long as the Slovakian Nazis keep pulling 11%, he can stay in the National Council forever). So when 2013 comes around there will be no legal reason for Czech Republic and Slovakia to be different countries. With reunification, the combined nation could get on the Euro ad grandfather in the Lisbon accords.

Of course, I don't think that the EU intends to wait more than 3 years to get procedural shit done. So I expect a showdown that involves Czechia getting slapped down any moment now.

-Username17

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8340664.stm

Well, there we go. I have to admit that I expected more fireworks.

The idea of claiming "fundamental rights" and then offering an opt-out is kind of amazing.

CatharzGodfoot wrote:The idea of claiming "fundamental rights" and then offering an opt-out is kind of amazing.

Meh. The US has long held that Native Americans don't count for purposes of fundamental declarations against genocide.

-Username17