By Barend ter Haar.
A referendum can strengthen democracy by involving citizens in the decision process. However, this will only work when there is a real choice. Let us take the imaginary example of a British referendum on moving their islands to a place between Australia and New Zealand. A large number of British citizens might vote Yes, but even when a majority would vote in favour, the United Kingdom would remain where it is, a few kilometers of the European continent.
The referendum on the European constitution in 2005 was a similar case. The Dutch population was asked its opinion on the proposed Constitution, but without a feasible alternative. So although a majority of the Dutch voters rejected it, after a few years a new European treaty with another name, but largely the same content as the Constitution was introduced and adopted by parliament.
Now a new Stop the world, I wanna get off referendum has been proposed, this time about the Association Agreement between Ukraine and the European Union. The treaty covers many areas, but the crux is that Ukraine commits itself to fundamental reforms and that the EU and its member states will provide Ukraine with political, financial, economic and scientific support.
The promoters of the referendum argue that the Netherlands should refrain from closer association with Ukraine because that country is corrupt and in conflict with Russia. Their assumption seems to be that as long as we close our borders and our eyes for what happens in Ukraine we will not be hampered by it.
That is what we thought about Syria also. That went “well” for years, but now we are confronted with the result of our negligence.
However, there are two important differences between Syria and Ukraine.
First of all: Ukraine is much closer to the Netherlands than Syria. By car it is about 1400 kilometers to the Ukrainian border. That is less than the distance to Rome or Madrid. The Chernobyl disaster and the recent shooting down of flight MH17[1] have made us painfully aware that we are not immune for what happens in Ukraine. And there is no Mediterranean Sea that will keep Ukrainians from fleeing to the West if Ukraine would become a failing state.
Secondly: whereas the situation in Syria provided us with few opportunities for successful intervention, the chances for helping Ukraine to move in the right direction have never been better. Both the current government and a large majority of the population want real reform.
The real question is therefore whether we are going to use the current window of opportunity to promote good governance in Ukraine or rather do nothing and just hope for the best. Of course, success is not guaranteed, but the chances are certainly much larger with the support that is foreseen in the Association Agreement than without that. Doing nothing is not a sensible alternative. The proposed referendum would therefore be based on a false question.
[1] See http://www.clingendael.nl/sites/default/files/Lessons-of-the-MH17-disaster.pdf
