Opinion

Stop referring to EU as a ‘bloc’ – this is divisive linguistic rot imported from Britain

European Union’s approach to an issue such as Gaza has been characterised more by member state division than unity

'The British political class and media needed an unsympathetic term for the EU in the wake of Brexit. It adopted the word 'bloc'.' Photograph: Frederick Florin/AFP
'The British political class and media needed an unsympathetic term for the EU in the wake of Brexit. It adopted the word 'bloc'.' Photograph: Frederick Florin/AFP
Bobby McDonagh
Mon Apr 29 2024 - 07:00

The word “bloc” to describe the European Union is becoming increasingly embedded in our political discourse in Ireland. A quick perusal of the RTÉ website indicates that it has posted articles this month referring to “the bloc’s green transition”; “the bloc’s parliamentary elections”; “the bloc’s agenda”; “the bloc’s biggest firms”; and “the bloc’s future competitiveness”. The increasingly ubiquitous usage of the term “bloc” can similarly be observed across other Irish media outlets and on broadcast media. The Irish Times is by no means immune to this development. The excellent Pat Leahy, for instance, in previewing Simon Harris’s first attendance at the European Council as Taoiseach, referred to areas where the EU treaties “give the bloc a role”.

As the citizens of 27 free, independent, diverse European countries prepare to participate in elections to the European Parliament in June, to the greatest supranational parliament in history, the increasing tendency to refer to the European Union as a bloc is becoming beyond ludicrous. The term bloc was principally used in the past to refer to an entity that was the antithesis of the EU, namely the Soviet or Eastern bloc. And it still carries connotations of that Soviet homogeneity and subjugation.

[ New EU migration pact will make walls of ‘fortress Europe’ higher ]

The only narrow context in which the word bloc makes any sense in relation to Europe is when referring to it specifically as a “trading bloc”. In any wider context, when talking about its nature, politics or foreign policy, there are several alternative appropriate terms that have been used satisfactorily for many decades: “the EU”, “the union”, “the European Union”, or – in the appropriate context – simply “Europe”.

US commentators have long been guilty of occasional lapses into the word “bloc” to refer to the EU. However, as far as Ireland is concerned, the linguistic rot seems to have set in with Brexit. The British political class and media, requiring a more unsympathetic, less embracing, term for the union of nations that the UK had left, have since then used the word bloc as a matter of course, often in headlines (See the Financial Times of April 19th: ”Watchdog Warns Bloc...”)

READ MORE

We will not be voting to send representatives to a rubber-stamp parliament in a monolithic ‘bloc’

Ireland has fortunately avoided the bulk of the damage inflicted by Brexit on the UK. However, Brexit seems – via this linguistic eccentricity – to have made an inroad into colonising our mindset. Another ill-judged occasional practice is referring to EU commissioners or other senior European office holders as “officials”.

Apart from its specific connotations of the Soviet empire and cold war, the term is – as I have previously argued – entirely inappropriate in relation to the European Union. It implies an inward-looking, navel-gazing EU, rather than the reality of an outward-facing Europe, a global champion of multilateralism, open to embracing new members, engaging constructively with the wider world. The term “bloc” suggests a rigid, undifferentiated Europe, the direct opposite of what it truly is, namely a flexible and richly diverse one. Its member states have different histories, perceptions and interests. They strenuously assert those interests every day, in every forum, at every level.

[ Coalition nervous about getting approval for EU migration pact ]

It is particularly ironic that the term “bloc” is used precisely in contexts in which Europe is self-evidently divided. For example, the fact that the EU’s approach on Gaza has been characterised by division rather than unity over the past six months hasn’t prevented the term from being used in that self-evidently inappropriate context.

As a word, it hints at a desire for military confrontation. While Putin’s brutal war on Ukraine is forcing Europe to think seriously about its own security, the EU is not seeking confrontation, and a very far cry from wanting war or indeed being prepared for it.

The term bloc was principally used to refer to an entity the antithesis of the EU, namely the Soviet or Eastern bloc. It still carries connotations of Soviet homogeneity and subjugation

The question is whether this specific misuse of terminology really matters, beyond our natural wish to avoid reflecting a Brexit mentality.

It matters greatly because language over time shapes how we think. The term “European Union”, and its variants, capture far better the essence and nature of our union. They convey the broadly positive experience of Europe for its member states and citizens. The concept of a union also conveys the sense of voluntary membership, an undercurrent of diversity, and the strong suggestion of shared values. The words we use are important for the way we see ourselves and how we are perceived by others. By and large, the Irish people and most of our politicians remain strongly pro-European. One small thing we can do to keep it that way is to avoid careless, imported, reductionist language.

The votes we will cast in the forthcoming European Parliament elections are a privilege and an opportunity to shape our children’s future on issues such as climate change, security and populism.

[ Russia vows to tighten border security and warns EU on using frozen assets to help Kyiv ]

We will not be voting to send representatives to a rubber-stamp parliament in a monolithic “bloc”. If that were the case, we could indulge ourselves by choosing politicians with outsize egos, political loudhailers and name-recognition that stretches as far as Moscow and Beijing. We will be electing representatives to the parliament of a European Union in which MEPs from a rich diversity of backgrounds will have the opportunity to advance the interests of their countries and of our union as a whole through vibrant democratic procedures that are as far from the workings of a “bloc” as it is possible to imagine.

Bobby McDonagh is a former ambassador of Ireland to London, Rome and Brussels