Vaccine disaster shows the fragility of the EU

There is part of continental Europe which is winning the vaccine war. By Maundy Thursday, every Gibraltarian will have been offered a jab, as will all Spaniards who work on the Rock. Their absenteeism rates have fallen. In Madrid, meanwhile, the Governor of Spain’s central bank recently expressed caution. Optimistic growth estimates had to be scaled down. It would take the Spanish economy longer than he had hoped to recover to pre-Covid levels. So the Spaniards could do with a bit of absenteeism, from hope.

But Gibraltar is not unique. Every British overseas territory has now been given sufficient doses to vaccinate its entire population, with one exception: remote Pitcairn.

So why are the overseas territories so fortunate, and why is the UK catching up fast? There is a simple answer: Europe, or rather the absence of Europe. If we had still been members of the EU and taken part in its scheme, our vaccination programme would have been held back, just as theirs have been. There would have been more deaths, more pressure on hospitals and less prospect of a rapid economic recovery.

Yet a lot of Europeans are in no mood to recognise that they have something to learn from the British. On the contrary. a number of them may be taking the opportunity to disrupt British imports. But that wise economic commentator Julian Jessop warns against reading too much into the latest trade figures. A degree of short-term disruption was inevitable and does not amount to economic sabotage.

Even so, there is plenty of anti-British feeling about, especially among the French political elite. If you read a recent debate in the French Senate, you will feel like revising Sir Philip Sidney’s ‘That sweet enemy France’ by deleting the ‘sweet’.

It is impossible to resist the temptation to gloat. Yet we should keep that within bounds. There is one crucial point which we should never forget. A successful Europe, economically and politically, benefits us as well as them. The EU is still our principal market. Obviously, we should do everything possible to develop other ones: we British have always made much of our living on the high seas. We can now re-evaluate all the Euro-regulations which may have been holding us back. Not all will be nonsensical. We should not wish to export, or import, defective electrical goods or unhealthy farm produce. But other regulations will prove to be in the same category as those which have obstructed the vaccines. Removing them should not be an excuse for trade restraints which would benefit no-one.

On the contrary, the nearest possible we can achieve to free trade between the UK and the 27 would be in everyone’s interests.

If only more Europeans were willing to recognise their own interests. For a start, they might examine their abject failure in Covid vaccination. Europe has massive medical, scientific and manufacturing capabilities. This crisis should have been an opportunity for the EU to show its paces: to demonstrate to its own peoples, and to the rest of the world, the advantages of ever-closer union. The Eurocrats did indeed show their paces. They insisted that everyone should move at the pace of the slowest.

The same is true of foreign affairs. Again, Europe has immense resources. But it has no idea how to use them. Look at Vladimir Putin. Over the past few years, he has played a weak hand with considerable skill. Look at the Chinese. They are playing an ever-stronger hand with ever-greater confidence, and no need to pay attention to the EU’s response. European foreign policy: was there ever a more blatant oxymoron?

From 1900 until 1945, European foreign policy was a succession of misjudgements and blunders. The consequence: two terrible wars which nearly ended with the destruction of European civilisation. The Europeans were rescued from the fate which they had almost brought upon themselves not by their own efforts, but by the Americans, who have received precious little gratitude in return.

The late General Dick Walters had a party piece which would always make Europeans squirm. “I understand why you want to see the back of us,” he would say. “In 1919, we cleared out of Europe and you had a wonderful twenty years: surely the greatest in your history. After 1945, we stayed, and you have had a terrible time.” Squirm, but not learn: there is no evidence of any greater foreign affairs wisdom among today’s European leaders than was true of their predecessors in the era of disaster.

At a conference in the early 1980s, that feisty American commentator Midge Decter asked the European participants if we wanted the US to continue to defend us. As we were all sensible, we of course chorused “Yes”. Midge continued: “Then you’re going to have to ask us real nice.” Well, few have done that, and yet they are still here. Given the anti-Americanism so prevalent in Leftist intellectual or, perhaps, pseudo-intellectual, circles, the Americans could claim to have defied Nietzsche’s dictum: “It is inhuman to bless where one is cursed.”

There is one curious aspect to the current European degringolade. According to the opinion polls, anti-EU sentiment appears to be on the decline. There is one obvious explanation for this: a widespread lack of self-confidence. The peoples of the EU have been assured that their voyage on this great liner will lead them to a glorious future. Now the liner seems to be turning into a life-raft. But no-one wants to jump off.

We must remember that the EU emerged from weakness and guilt. It offered psychotherapy as well as social and economic progress. But the Euro-psychiatrists have failed. The Spanish are still unreconciled to their past. Andreotti was once asked whether there could be a coup d’etat  in Italy. “No” came the reply. “There is no etat.” In Rome, they are still inclined to say, “Dopo Roma, Africa.” (The Florentine version is “Dopo Firenze”.) For decades, much of the Italian elite was looking to The EU to enforce the reforms which Italy needed, but which its domestic politics was incapable of delivering. They hoped that a man would get off a plane from Brussels and tell them what to do. Plenty of men have indeed made that journey, and joined forces with Italian technocrats. Italian politics remains as chaotic as ever. Italy survives because it has learned to do without stable governments, and balance-sheets.

The French would still like to run Europe as a French jockey on a German horse. There are two problems with that. First, most of the other 25 nations would prefer a different style of racing. Second, there are signs that the new generations in Germany no longer believe that their politics should be dominated by war guilt. They are growing fed up with paying Euro-gelt, to enable Greek civil servants to retire at 55. There are storms ahead.

One part of the life-raft has survived far better than expected. When Mario Draghi said that the ECB would do whatever it took to keep the Euro afloat, insufficient notice was taken. But thus far, Draghi-ism has prevailed. It still seems impossible that Amsterdam and Athens, Munich and Messina, could continue to use the same currency without fiscal and political union.

One is tempted to paraphrase another poet: “Euro-kind cannot bear very much reality.” But unreality has been surprisingly durable. There is a case for recognising this in the EU’s anthem. Drop “Ode to Joy” and replace it with “We’re here because we’re here because we’re here.” I hope that does not sound like gloating.