Opinion – Brexit fight will be won, or lost, on the economy | EurActiv – John Gelmini

I agree with the article and with Dr Alf too.

Brexit/membership of the EU will be based on an assessment of delivery.

So far, the EU has not produced a single net new job in 30 years, has not produced a situation whereby we have not had European wars and ethnic cleansing and has not enabled Europe to make the traffic lights turn green in the great councils of the world in Beijing and Washington.

The EU is an entity effectively controlled by a resurgent and powerful Germany and it is Chancellor Merkel that the Chinese rate and France that the Americans see as their military partner of choice, rather than the UK.

The EU has to start delivering on its promise and the benefits it was supposed to bring us from 1975 onwards when we had the first referendum and entered it.

So far, it has not delivered anything of value in 40 years, so the benefits of membership need to be clear and obvious by next year if the new referendum is to be brought forward or by 2017 if it is held at the originally promised time.

Whilst initiatives take time, 40 years ought to be long enough to demonstrate hard benefits that people like me can see and that experienced Chartered Accountants like Dr Alf can quantify using objective measures.

I wait with interest but with measured skepticism.

John Gelmini

Increased Sino-German strategic cooperation and implications for UK foreign policy – John Gelmini

English: The Fall of the Berlin Wall, 1989. Th...

English: The Fall of the Berlin Wall, 1989. The photo shows a part of a public photo documentation wall at Former Check Point Charlie, Berlin. The photo documentation is permanently placed in the public. Türkçe: Berlin Duvarı, 1989 sonbaharı (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Dr Alf’s question about Germany turning more to China as a strategic partner is going to mean that European foreign policy which does not speak with one voice anyway, will become increasingly split.

Currently, European foreign policy is NATO foreign policy, which is British foreign policy through the Royal Institute of Strategic Studies instructing the American Council on Foreign Relations, which in turn tell the Americans what to do, along with the Government of Israel, through their AIPAC lobbying arm in public and directly in private.

Germany is economically dominant in Europe, and is not interested in foreign military adventurism, which means that they will want to contribute money to NATO for peacekeeping purposes and occasionally troops.

Beyond that, they (Germany) will not overtly support moves to effect regime change or change the pieces on the Middle East chessboard.

Angela Merkel has read the runes, seen that power, money and influence are moving eastwards and is positioning Germany to take advantage.

David Cameron’s Government should see what is happening and consider how best to position the UK for the future.

Within the context of a two-speed Europe, this will mean the UK remaining marginalized, paying too much tax, subsidizing the PIIG countries, and eventually being told what to do for foreign policy by the Americans now that the City of London is on its way to being relegated to 4th place in the world by 2016 with Hong Kong 1st, Singapore 2nd, New York 3rd.

This is what will happen regardless of anything that David Cameron, or his successor, might do.
Since Russian and Chinese foreign policy are for the moment, converging and Russia and Germany are co-operating on major industrial and engineering projects, differences will emerge between what the Americans want and the policies of China, Russia and Germany in the wings.

Power always follows money and economic growth, so what David Cameron should do but will not do, is position this country as an attractive offshore tax haven modeled on Switzerland and Singapore and stop posturing on the world stage as if we were a superpower.

John Gelmini

Enhanced by Zemanta