The Independent Republic of Malta is once again facing a crisis of national identity, of not knowing where precisely she stands within the house of Europe. Nestled in the middle of the Mediterranean at crossroads with Europe, Africa and Asia Minor, Malta has over the centuries fallen prey to a succession of conquering armies hell bent on looting the island and asserting control of sea lanes. With each foreign foray came not only periods of extended occupation but also infusions of new economic models and cultural events which the natives conveniently absorbed as their own. The most remarkable episode was the establishment of Maltese, a Semitic dialect with roots in Phoenicia and Carthage as the native language, in consequence of 220 years of Arab rule. In spite of Malta's Arab connection its population is by far and large Christian and of European origin. Stung by repeated sufferance under foreign rule and only recently freed from British colonialism contemporary Maltese are understandably reluctant to trade away their hard won freedom as a free unencumbered nation in favor of becoming a member state within the European Union (EU). Many fear the move will result in a diminution of sovereignty and a lessening of Maltese identity. They postulate Malta should remain a separate nation rather than become a small part of a larger EU.
There exist two prevailing attitudes on the question of full EU membership for Malta. The Maltese Labor Party (MLP) led by Dr. A. Sant currently in power is against European amalgamation and in favor of establishing alternative protocols with the EU on tariffs and trade, without giving away Malta's hard won independence in the bargain. By contrast the minority National Party (NP) of opposition led by Dr. Eddie Fenech Adami champions unity with the EU as a way to promote Malta's prosperity in the near and distant future, at the acknowledged risk of diluting Malta's insular national character by an irreversible influx of foreign influence and control.
The political divide in Malta is split down the middle between skilled craftsmen and tradesmen voting for labor while business owners and professional folks support nationalist platforms. Election results are often predicated on blind empathy for one's party of choice instead of being logically based on public debate dealing with substantive issues. This Maltese voting peculiarity says much about the MLP being voted into power during the last general election on the promise of suspending Malta's application for EU membership. The pendulum of public opinion on this vital issue, once strongly opposed against the EU , is starting to swing in the opposite direction in favor of joining. There is now a growing awareness amongst Malta's rank and file that something terribly wrong might have transpired with the MLP's hasty decision to withdraw their nation's request to become a part of the EU. In fact the majority of MLP & PN members of parliament have gone on record in favor of reapplication despite Dr. Sant's intransigence against a reversal of policy. In the end the impasse might well be settled by a referendum should powerful labor politicians refuse to budge from a position of no compromise. Whether the EU will welcome Malta back into its fold later on with more stringent terms of admission than would have been the case the first time around is a different issue deserving its own in-depth analysis.
In a game of international chess where stakes are high and the king rules supreme over his domain a pawn must move with great awareness and skill to avoid being devoured. By analogy this truism stands at the core of negotiations between the EU and Malta. In any political/business partnership the spoils of success are predicated on the basis of interactivity and mutual contributions, in a dynamic game of give and take. Malta's diminutive size and limited gross national product places it at a severe disadvantage in dealing with larger nations. There is after all substance in the concept of "first amongst equals" and in this equation Malta takes a back seat. A possible solution to this difficult dilemma bordering on national pride and dignity is to allow Malta a vote on the EU council in proportion to its population and collective effort.
The price of EU admission for Malta will entail a combination of pluses and minuses, the net sum of which will hopefully show an incremental improvement in living standards at par with her European partners. A partial loss of sovereignty does not necessarily mean an end of ethnicity or submersion of its national identity as feared by some. It simply means the observance of EU rules and standards for the general welfare of all member participants. Playing by the same set of rules as everyone else will bring Malta stability and with it more foreign investments and manufacturing industries. Access to EU lines of credit for loans and grants will open up for the improvement of Malta's crumbling infrastructure. Malta's culture and language will no more be endangered by foreign influence than they are now. Restrictive export/import tariffs and quotas will give way to healthy competitive barter based solely on market driven forces of supply and demand. The harmful perpetuation of vested protection for labor unions, civil service employees, parastatal and private commercial ventures will cease to exist. If other culturally fixated nations like Britain, Germany and France do not feel threatened by the EU why should Malta not feel equally at ease dealing in partnership with its northern neighbors. What Malta deserves is less ingrained socialism and a bigger dose of a free market democratic society.
There remain two other promising propositions which will greatly benefit Malta in association with the EU. The first is tourism now at a distinct disadvantage because of a highly inflationary rate of exchange of the Maltese currency relative to the US$ and other denominations, as well as excessive taxation imposed on retail merchandise, food and hotel accommodations. The usage in Malta of a common European currency will eliminate the shameless highway robbery of visitors to the islands now officially endorsed by the Maltese government. The Maltese Lira will become a simple expression of the Euro and be traded at a fixed rate. A more moderate consumer tax will in turn generate increased trade and by extension provide additional income for government coffers. Without these artificial barriers the quality of tourists particularly from the United States should improve notably at four and five star hotels and fine eating establishments now serving Malta. Other less affluent tourists from Eastern Europe and Asia stand to also gain in proportion to their spending abilities.
EU membership will bring with it an expanded horizon for higher education. Reciprocal student exchange protocols will allow Maltese and foreign students an opportunity to study at each other's colleges and universities. There will be a greater choice of curricula and far more flexibility in registration, and validation of conferred degrees by participating countries on a scale now not within reach. Accreditation standards for staff, faculty and courses of instruction recognized as valid by all member nations is a prime example of how Malta stands to gain through the EU. There are of course many other enrichments above and beyond those already mentioned. But for Malta to benefit in full she must first go back to where she belongs as a daughter of the house of Europe in the same manner as the wayward prodigal son returned to his biblical family.
E-mail to Joseph Vella: vellajoseph@msn.net
|
|
