When nations under the European Union close their borders to protect their people from the coronavirus, the pomposity of the EU is exposed. This is a telling sign that its serpentine grip on its empire is slipping.

On April 2, the Court of Justice of the European Union, the EU’s “supreme court,” ruled that its member nations have no right to control their borders, unless they have first gained the EU’s permission to do so. This, at least was the essence of the ruling, which appertained to the migrant crisis of 2015 and which reprimanded those countries that had refused to open their doors to the mandatory quota of migrants that the EU had sought to impose on them.

“By refusing to comply with the temporary mechanism for the relocation of applicants for international protection,” the Court of Justice said in its ruling, “Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic have failed to fulfil their obligations under European Union law.”

Seeing through the EU’s jargon, these three countries believed that the vast majority of the migrants were not “applicants for international protection” but were merely economic migrants from mostly Muslim countries seeking illegal entry into Europe, amongst whom might be many potential terrorists. “The most important goal of government policy is to ensure security for our citizens,” said Polish government spokesman Piotr Müller. “Our actions were dictated by the interests of Polish citizens and defending [the country] against uncontrolled migration.”

The EU’s Court of Justice also stipulated in its ruling that “those Member States can rely neither on their responsibilities concerning the maintenance of law and order and the safeguarding of internal security, nor on the alleged malfunctioning of the relocation mechanism to avoid implementing that mechanism.” Let’s reiterate what this court ruling states, as outrageous as it is, in order to fully comprehend its tyrannous nature. The member states of the European Union have no legal right to safeguard their own internal security, nor even maintain law and order, if the EU orders them to do something that endangers both. This is nothing less than imperialism of the most egregious sort, riding roughshod over any semblance of subsidiarity, which the EU claims that its members possess.

Mr. Müller, defending Poland’s actions, stated that the “tough attitude” of Poland and the Visegrad Group, a regional cooperation platform within the EU, had now been effectively adopted throughout the whole of Europe, irrespective of EU mandates and EU court rulings. “The entire European Union changed its approach to migration policy and moved away from the mandatory relocation of refugees,” he asserted. Mr. Müller’s words were echoed by Polish Foreign Minister Jacek Czaputowicz, who told reporters last month that the European Union was changing its policy on migration and refugees in favour of an approach urged by Poland and Hungary. “This approach, championed by Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban and based on securing and protecting borders and stopping waves of illegal migration, has prevailed,” Dr. Czaputowicz said, speaking after a meeting in Zagreb, Croatia at which EU foreign ministers had vowed to support the Greek government in securing the EU’s external border against an influx of migrants.

There is really a delicious irony in the timing of the European Court’s decision, which exposes its sheer and preposterous pomposity, when every nation in the European Union is controlling its borders, in the face of the deadly threat of the coronavirus, without giving the least thought to seeking the EU’s permission. The European Court of Justice can pontificate as much as it likes. Nobody is listening and nobody cares.

These are telling signs that the EU’s serpentine grip on its empire is slipping. European Union law, once a venomous asp, is now seen as an ass. Always unjust, it is now seemingly unenforceable. The small nations of central Europe, such as Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic, have stood their ground and have faced down the tyrant. The European Davids have defeated the EU Goliath.

Continuing with the serpentine metaphor, we can say that the EU python is becoming pythonesque, as in Monty Python. It is metamorphosing from being obscene to being merely absurd. And switching metaphors, we might say it is a tyrannosaurus rex, a monstrous tyranny that is evolving towards its own extinction; a T-Rex that has lost its bite because it is losing its teeth. If this is so, and let’s hope that it is, there’s no need for the small nations within the EU to seek what we might call T-Rexit. They can stay within a weakening EU as long as they have the courage to flex their political muscle through the practice of their sovereign rights as nations. It’s a choice between flex it or T-Rexit. Any EU laws that state that member states have no sovereign rights should simply continue to be ignored, as they have been ignored and are being ignored. If this happens, the EU as we now know it will wither and die and will be replaced by a Europe of friendly cooperating neighbours, freed at last from the burgeoning bureaucracy which had tried to force a tyrannical union upon them. This, at least, should be the hope and the goal of all genuine Europhiles, of all those genuine lovers of Europe and its many gloriously unique nations.

The Imaginative Conservative applies the principle of appreciation to the discussion of culture and politics—we approach dialogue with magnanimity rather than with mere civility. Will you help us remain a refreshing oasis in the increasingly contentious arena of modern discourse? Please consider donating now.

The featured image is courtesy of Unsplash.

All comments are moderated and must be civil, concise, and constructive to the conversation. Comments that are critical of an essay may be approved, but comments containing ad hominem criticism of the author will not be published. Also, comments containing web links or block quotations are unlikely to be approved. Keep in mind that essays represent the opinions of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Imaginative Conservative or its editor or publisher.

Leave a Comment
Print Friendly, PDF & Email