Europe: Penn and Europe

Andrew Lane reflects on William Penn’s essay of 1693

A century before the Napoleonic wars, and two centuries before the first and second world wars, Quaker William Penn proposed a parliament through which the princes and states of Europe could resolve disputes nonviolently. Penn’s 1693 essay, ‘Towards the present and future peace of Europe’, was the first proposal for a confederation of European states written in the English language. It has been referred to in some recent articles and letters in the Friend, and is worthy of closer study.

Penn examined many practical issues that are relevant to the European Union (EU) of 2016. For example, he considered how to create a parliament that could fairly represent member states of unequal size, proposing a similar system to that used for the European Parliament today. He also recommended a circular room be used to avoid quarrels over status, a model that has proved its worth. The essay proposed common institutions be used to deepen ties between the peoples of Europe. The Schengen free movement area and the ‘Erasmus’ study abroad scheme are examples of EU policies that fulfil this purpose today.

Penn addressed concerns that shared institutions would reduce the sovereignty of the warring princes and states of seventeenth century Europe. He argued that true sovereignty comes through the avoidance of war and occupation.

European political structures provide a mechanism for just negotiation, contributing to a continent free of war. As Penn says in his essay: ‘For that which prevents a civil war in a nation is that which may prevent it abroad, viz. Justice.’ As a consequence of globalisation, the relative power of the nation-state has reduced in comparison to multinational corporations. Countries now need institutions that cross national boundaries if they are to effectively regulate global businesses. As the Norwegian prime minister has said, EU membership is actually a mechanism through which the UK can protect its sovereignty.

The proposed EU-US Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) is of concern to many Friends and is sometimes cited as a reason to leave the EU. Rather than being the dictate of an invisible bureaucracy, any single government of a EU country could block the whole deal. So could the European Parliament if a majority of its MEPs voted to do so. Two MEPs are Quakers and both are working hard on this issue.

The leaders of the EU’s twenty-eight countries are scheduled to meet four times a year to set the strategy for the EU, and direct the work of the European Commission. In 2015 they met twelve times – just one sign of a EU in crisis.

The EU’s multiple challenges include the Eurozone debt crisis, a failure of leadership on refugees and the resurgence of far-right or anti-European parties. There are also particular concerns about Hungary and Poland, whose governments have been accused of undermining democratic institutions and human rights standards. Brexit would be an additional pressure on an EU that is already at risk of slow disintegration. Common EU policies are the last line of protection for employment rights, women’s rights, gay rights and more. When people in Hungary and Poland demonstrate against new authoritarian governments, many choose to march under the EU flag.

Penn’s essay is not distracted by the question of whether people living in Britain would be materially better off under his proposals. He was imaging the processes of peace. Now is our opportunity to imagine anew what European cooperation can achieve, even when challenged by the divisive rhetoric of self-interest and fear.

---

Comments

Please login to add a comment