commentary

(Washington Times)

What's Next for EU… and U.S.?

by Robert E. Hunter

June 5, 2005

France and the Netherlands have issued a resounding "no" to the EU Constitution. But before seeing this as a basic assault on Project Europe, it is important to look at some of the special reasons for the rejection -- and decide what to do.

One reason the European "constitution" was rejected May 29 by French voters and June 1 by Dutch voters was it had the wrong name. The document is not, technically, a constitution but a "constitutional treaty." It takes the bulk of existing European Union law, adds devices to deal with the addition of 10 member nations, and republishes material from other acts of union beginning with the 1956 Treaty of Rome.


Robert E. Hunter was U.S. ambassador to NATO from 1993 to 1998 and is a senior adviser at the RAND Corp.

The remainder of this op-ed can be found at washingtontimes.com.

This commentary originally appeared in Washington Times on June 5, 2005. Commentary gives RAND researchers a platform to convey insights based on their professional expertise and often on their peer-reviewed research and analysis.