Declaration may counter Irish 'no' vote
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.All 15 member states of the European Union will be asked for an unprecedented declaration of support for the push to bring in 10 more countries if Ireland votes against the Nice Treaty next week.
Although officials deny the existence of a "plan B" if Ireland rejects the Nice Treaty for a second time, they are already thinking of ways in which they could salvage the enlargement process.
A "no" vote would threaten enlargement because the Nice Treaty, which spells out many of the changes needed for the EU to expand, has to be ratified by all member states.
But officials say that a declaration of support for enlargement from the Dail and from parliaments or governments in other member states would let the European Commission pursue preparations for enlargement, without looking as if it is ignoring the democratic will of the voters.
They argue that it is not for Brussels to interpret a "no" vote as a rejection of enlargement or other parts of the treaty. But countries thought to be less enthusiastic on enlargement may press for the process to be delayed until the next treaty, due to be drawn up in 2004, is approved and ratified.
Jonathan Faull, spokesman for the Commission, argued: "We don't know what the consequences of a 'no' vote would be. A new political dynamic would be created within the Union and in many of the candidate countries."
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments