The political establishment will be careful not to repeat the mistakes and complacency of Nice 1, and the laughable nature of much of the no campaign will not help their credibility. When Bertie resigned he took much of the anti-government sentiment which was fueling the no campaign with him, and so I would expect to see the referendum now passed, albeit with a low poll and possibly a relatively narrow majority.
Sinn Fein and the No campaigners will treat even a wide margin of defeat as a major victory, given that they can scarcely muster 10% of the electorate between them when it comes to a general election.
However the emergence of shadowy groups like Libertas and Coir marks a new low in democratic politics in Ireland, and it is to be hoped that they will be resoundingly defeated.
The Irish Times has now run with the story Colman and I flagged in an LTE they failed to publish - linking Declan Ganly to the US security establishment - although not making explicit that establishments opposition to the Lisbon Treaty. For the record, our LTE (published in large part by the Sunday Business Post) was as follows:
Declan Ganley, a multi-millionaire estimated to be worth €300M, is Chairman of the self-styled "think-tank" Libertas which, according to the Sunday Business Post (27/1/08), is expected to fund its €1.5M anti-Treaty campaign mainly by way of loans and direct contributions from Ganley's own resources. Declan Ganley is also Chairman and CEO of Rivada Networks, a US Defense contractor with former Generals, Admirals, and key members of the US defense establishment on its board. According to Jane's Intelligence Digest (17/1/08, "New EU treaty worries US intel services") "United States policymakers are concerned its provisions could present serious challenges to transatlantic intelligence and homeland security co-operation.".... "US intelligence and security officials have been able to circumvent EU institutions in many cases so far by relying extensively on formal and informal arrangements with the individual member governments. In addition, Washington has felt confident that its European allies would use their powers to veto unwelcome EU-wide proposals in areas related to security and defence. If adopted, the Lisbon treaty could threaten many of these arrangements. " In other words, the US intelligence establishment is confident that Ireland, acting on its own, would never effectively oppose such things as rendition flights through Shannon, whereas the EU, with a strengthened Common Foreign and Security Policy and a legally binding Charter of Fundamental Rights, just might. Could there be a connection here?
According to Jane's Intelligence Digest (17/1/08, "New EU treaty worries US intel services") "United States policymakers are concerned its provisions could present serious challenges to transatlantic intelligence and homeland security co-operation.".... "US intelligence and security officials have been able to circumvent EU institutions in many cases so far by relying extensively on formal and informal arrangements with the individual member governments. In addition, Washington has felt confident that its European allies would use their powers to veto unwelcome EU-wide proposals in areas related to security and defence. If adopted, the Lisbon treaty could threaten many of these arrangements. "
In other words, the US intelligence establishment is confident that Ireland, acting on its own, would never effectively oppose such things as rendition flights through Shannon, whereas the EU, with a strengthened Common Foreign and Security Policy and a legally binding Charter of Fundamental Rights, just might.
Could there be a connection here?
