For months, Dublin has huddled under a blizzard of political debate that blanketed every wall, telephone pole, and street corner with drifts of flyers, proclaiming loudly (in Gaelic as well as English) either, “Vote Yes!” or “Vote No!”

The controversy surrounded the Lisbon Treaty, whose promised reform of unwieldy EU institutions
failed in a national referendum in Ireland on Thursday. The controversy surrounding the Treaty resembled the fierce debates over the US Constitution, both in passionate intensity and in the opposition of regional autonomy to international national unity. Though a majority of Ireland’s poltical leaders and business interests supported the treaty, a campaign of widespread grassroots lobbying, headed by Libertas.org, was able to derail Lisbon’s passage, and potentially spell its demise since all 27 member states must ratify.

The Lisbon Treaty seeks to consolidate the EU as a political body in order to improve inter-state commerce and allow Europe to act as a more unified, stronger international player. Controversies included the creation of an appointed (unelected) President and Foreign Minister with longer term lengths, the reduction of the European Commission from a council of all 27 member states to a rotating body of 2/3 the members, and a greatly shortened list of areas subject to the veto of a single state.

Europa.com, an EU database, claims that Lisbon will produce not only “a more efficient Europe” – better able to combat terrorism, reduce international barriers to trade, and fight global warming – but also “a more democratic and transparent Europe,” by strengthening the power of the European Parliament, elected by EU citizens.

However, Libertas.org presents a very different view of Lisbon, positing a laundry list of objections to its passage: Lisbon “halves Ireland’s voting weight while doubling Germany’s,” “abolishes Ireland’s commissioner for five years at a time,” “opens the door to tax interference,” and generally “hands over power…to Brussels.”

Advocates for the Treaty focus on its ability to foster economic growth and political unity in the EU, while its opponents emphasize its potential for diminishing national sovereignty and cultural distinctions within Europe.

This threat has particular poignancy for the Irish, who endured nearly 900 years of political domination by Great Britain, only securing their independence after a bloody revolution in 1916. Ireland is a nation still fiercely in search of a distinctive identity: all government documents, including street signs, are printed in both English and Gaelic, a language spoken by fewer than 1% of the population. The words of a Dublin tour guide and Irish historian named Paul seem to capture the public attitude towards Lisbon: “It would spell the end of democracy in Europe.”