So Iceland could be an EU member state by 2011. As an expansion of the Union, it’s an interesting one when compared to other recent additions. Culturally Scandinavian, Iceland will have friends already inside, and there are little if any of the corruption problems that have blighted Bulgaria, or the myriad of issues that have come with interest from the other Balkan states.

I’ve posted on this before, and I’m still in a bit of a split mind about expansion of the EU. The problem which is blocking me from taking one view or the other is that I want to think of there being some form of common European identity, which can act as the bond that will keep European states together, and allow more integration. It’s clear that this is present in Iceland, but try as I might, I find it hard to extend this to Turkey. There is much in Turkish society to give it close links to Europe, but just as that may be the case, there is more to distance it from the cultural bond in music, art, language and society that is shared between people and states in ‘old’ Europe.

I said I was in a split mind though, and I’ve just given reasons why I think Iceland should be admitted to the EU, while Turkey shouldn’t. The other part of my mind wants to see Turkey in the EU, along with Iceland, to fulfil the idea of the EU being a way of spreading the values of human rights and democracy.

I still don’t know which argument I agree with more. I guess I have to choose between a tightly integrated cultural Europe, or a looser beacon of all things good Europe.

Little tiny disclaimer: I’m differing from European Greens policy quite a lot here, so even though there is a European Greens election banner at the top of the page, this post in no way reflects the view of the party. Oh, and think big, vote Green!

And so Lisbon stumbles and limps onwards towards that hopeful day when it might finally be ratified. Tomorrow could see the lower house of the Czech parliament having another go at voting on the treaty, though given their past record I don’t hold out much hope of the vote actually taking place. If it does though, it will have to be in reference to the news from Ireland that with 51% of voters now supporting Lisbon, the second referendum may be moved to June, to coincide with the EP elections.

I’m generally in favour of Lisbon, though my understanding of exactly what it says is marred by the fact that it is an amending treaty, rather than the originally coherent constitution, and is filled with paragraphs such as:

the words ‘this Treaty’ and ‘the present Treaty’ shall be replaced by ‘the Treaties’, the verb, where applicable, shall be put in the plural and any necessary grammatical changes shall be made; this point shall not apply to the third paragraph of Article 182 and to Articles 312 and 313; 

Now clearly this makes sense, but only if you happen to have copies of the Treaty on the European Union, and the Treaty Establishing the European Community to hand, coupled with a lot of patience. To be fair, the protocols later in the treaty are more readable, but European citizens are still presented with a largely incomprehensible and highly technical document. Of course, as with most legislation, citizens themselves rarely see the raw material. But the barrier to entry on something as important as Lisbon means that the alternative way of participating in the political discourse—through the media—is vulnerable to the sort of lies and scare-mongering which was seen in the Irish ‘no’ campaign, and which will likely be seen again in June or October, and in any referendum held in the UK.

The aims of Lisbon are frequently ignored in debate on the treaty, and should it ever be fully ratified, we’ll be able to enjoy a better and more democratic Union, but I’m certain the legitimacy of the treaty will be called into doubt after so much of a muddle has been made over its implementation.

I just can’t help but think, that despite all the will in the world, the European Union might be nearing defeat on the Lisbon Treaty, just as it did with the Constitutional Treaty. Two things have prompted me to come to this opinion: the state of Europe’s economy, and yesterday’s decision by the Czech lower house of parliament to postpone its vote on Lisbon until the 17th of this month.

As well as the growing strength of more extreme forms of politics, as I mentioned the other day, I think that the economic woes we all currently face across Europe cause states to reconsider how strongly they value their sovereignty. The European project relies on the pooling of sovereignty for common benefit of member states. Without this, we may as well scale European integration back to the cosy intergovernmental confines of the European Free Trade Association and the Council of Europe. But naturally, pooling of sovereignty means that a number of decisions, primarily economic, are taken from the hands of national leaders, and placed in Brussel, Strasbourg and Frankfurt. When people are easily manipulated by the far-right, and member states’ governments seek an ‘anything which could save us’ approach, as many are trying to do now, distancing of decision making, in what are perceived to be the hands of foreigners, just won’t wash with a lot of the electorate.

I personally hope that something of Lisbon’s ilk, eventually passes. But I can’t see Lisbon itself being ratified. The EU should start afresh and (I shudder as I borrow a term from the Scottish National Party here) promote an ‘international conversation’ on how to proceed with the European project. Not a debate solely between national governments and policy wonks, but a debate which includes all European citizens. Discussing the facts of the matter, without recourse to plainly domestic affairs (sending messages on the popularity of the present government, and similar), or scare-mongering as was seen in the Irish referendum.

The only way forward for Europe, which will ensure a sustainable future for integration and strong partnership between member states, is for European citizens to wake up, and realise what Europe is, and what it means. What benefits it brings, and how it needs to be improved.

For the past few years, I’ve written a post on my personal blog summing up the year, and now that I have the Thursday Briefing, I thought I’d start a new habit by doing the same here.

So what have been my political highlights of last year? I think I’d have to put following the Climate and Energy Package up there pretty highly, though in terms of what people visit this blog for, the Torpedo Amendments of the Telecoms Package are a close contender. I’m still at the top position on Google in the UK for the search on them. In domestic politics, the change at the helm of the Scottish Greens was obviously significant, and I don’t think I’ll ever see such an impressive and heartfelt farewell as was given to Robin at the party conference in September.

Personally, this year has been dominated by my discovery of European politics. Surprisingly, the first time I got involved in the Federation of Young European Greens was only February! Since then I’ve certainly experienced quite a lot, including learning how to deal with vehemently pro-European Belgians (though I’m certainly still learning that).

On last year’s end of year post, I wrote about what I wanted to see in the coming year. Proving that, despite feeling recent, the ‘credit-crunch’ has been with us for plenty of time now, I looked forward to “subdued consumerism” and the ensuing environmental benefits. Well thanks to the extensive media coverage of it all – not to mention the year to mull things over – I’ve realised that it’d be nice to have a decent economy which works for people and planet, rather than the short-term gain from the current troubles. Fortunately the Green New Deal came along with a perfect Green rescue plan, and was even picked up by the UN, albeit in a slightly watered down form. Hopefully 2009 will see the first steps of the “carbon army”.

On a different level, I’d like to see greens in the UK realise that there’s a whole continent out there, and so many opportunities to work with fellow greens, to really get our message across, and make sure that we get as many people into office as possible, giving us a chance to prove that it is possible to repair the damage to the environment, prevent future degradation, and reconnect people with both their planet, and their fellow people.

Grand words, I know, and I’m sure I’ll face accusations of forgetting the grassroots and local basis of the green movement.

2005 really was the year when green was trendy. We still had plenty of borrowed money floating around, so it was fine to conspicuously consume the Fairtrade coffee, Duchy Originals biscuits, and People Tree clothes. New Consumer magazine was in its heyday, and even scored an interview with Leonardo di’Caprio.

However, while the economic downturn has moved people from Waitrose to Lidl, and from Duchy to digestives, I’ve noticed something else start to happen. Something very heartening indeed, so long as you don’t manufacture organic hemp jeans. Green policies are slowly being picked up in the significant levels of government. The people who make the decisions are finally starting — and I emphasise ‘starting’ — to make the right decisions, not just those which look good. The Green proposed plans for universal free insulation in Scotland are a great example of this.

So, let 2009 bring copious insulation,  more elected Greens, and a rejigged Green economy.