The people in Britain were not given the opportunity to decide when others peoples in Europe had their say. British Democracy? What British Democracy?

Though flattered that the EU is being mentored by the American historical experience, one can only hope they pick up on our virtues and not our vices.

This is absolutely ridiculous to compare USA and the EU. United States was a Confederation in the beginning coming from the Colonies. They became a nation United by the fact they all have in common ideals and common goal. Europe is full of nation states full of different cultures and history that span the ages. EU government is being placed on top of nation states government practically against their will. This treaty has been rejected multiple times and they can't take NO for an answer and kept pushing it. There isn't anything democratic about the EU what so ever. Most people refer to it as the EUSSR for a reason and its rise to power is definitely concerning.

@D. Larsen "Though flattered that the EU is being mentored by the American historical experience, one can only hope they pick up on our virtues and not our vices." They did help create that god awful state in Kosovo.

EU has no future unless they get rid of american occupaton.

This EU let us see and konws that ther is not any kind of democracy ! Now it is clear that democracy is just onother practical joke! It is just the creation on unnatural way of the former Roman Imperium !

The Lisbon changes are against the will of majority of European population. The last round of voting in Ireland was a joke. After hitting Irelend below the belt, and showing them exactly what can be done to their "prosperity", it scared the urban population our of their wits. Comparison with US has one valid factor. The more united Europe is forged by US. The "Europe dillema", as discussed by Zbignew Brzezinski in "The Grand Chessboard" is ahead of US policy makers. The dillema consists of giving Europe more regional indpendence, or using the more centralized and unified Europe as a means of easier and more effective control. History lessons cannot be learned by rigid application of analytical principles taken out of its context. Unified Europe, Lisbon style, would have only twenty years ago meant more US controlled Europe. Today, it is anybody's guess. Under new financial restructuring going on globally, it is very possible that Europe may become a regional power, the way Turkey is now emerging. Turkey may not have European economic and financial leverage, but has more then Europe in geopolitical leverage. It is very likely that Japan will emerge as a regional power, while the situation on Indian subcontinent has yet to play itself out. Given the trends, it is more likely that Europe charts its own course. We may have seen the evidence just last week. The day Ms. Markel was leaving US, as an afterthough, GM --- in fact US government that is the majority owner --- decides not to sell Opel. The sound of the slap has been heard accross Atlantic. Within 48 hours, Europe strikes back. Finland and Sweden approve, on the same day, the environmental plan for Nord Stream. Or just a strange "coincidence". It is inevitable for Europe, Turkey and Japan to assert more independent role. Not in opposition to US by any stretch of immagination. But to insure that their own regional interests are not just simply submerged and lost in the "global" management pursued by US. Turkey has been the first to seek economic and political connections with Asia and Middle East, and strenghten ties with Russia. Japan and Europe are just now evaluating their interests, balancing them with the needs of US partner. Japan has become especially vulnerable, as it became isolated from the Asian economic integrations. Now, it has some catching up to do, especially in regard to trade relations with China. Europe has some catching up to do as well with Russia. But in Europe, this will prove more difficult. Lisbon will minimize the damage that the "new Europe" created over time. But the unsettled Balkans will remain a problem. Obama Administration is suffering from leaving many holdovers from previous administrations (both Clinton and Bush) in key positions all over the Government. This is why many projects are happening by inertia, by people who have been in charge of those projects. Every now and then, the virus kicks in, and there is a "renewed" spirit of Halbrooke in Bosnia, examining and reexamining, stirring things up, and forging loyalties. Same is true with stirring things up in Bulgaria, Romania, Moldova, Serbia, Macedonia and of course --- Kosovo. Will Obama Administration finally come to the lower ranks of its Administration, and get some fresh air in --- nobody knows. Or it perhaps will not be possible for as long as Ms. Clinton is in charge. All other comparisons with US history are not very applicable. America was shaped at first by a happy historical circumstance --- isolationism. British Empire did not grasp the significance of loosing colonies, and when it did, it was too late. The potential for development, that is, endless explansion to new lands and resources without serious military threat from natives, created an unusual set of circumstances. The civil war was mostly the war for the control of the West, and Westward expansion --- no matter what the other, more romantic stories tell us. The end of the civil war created the unity of INTERESTS, not ideals. Ideals came AFTER the interests issues have been ironed out among the elites. Other historic fortunes involved the relative distance from the European wars of self-destruction, WWI and WWII. Europe thought they were about to control the entire world. it was within their grasp. This is the main reason why they fought --- to insure that the winner takes all. Well, they misjudged. After WWI, British Empire was not Empire any more, even though in their vocabulary and attitudes, they believed they were. WWII clarified that, for sure. Cold war was, according to Condoleeza Rice, the largest economic blocade known to mankind. Soviet Union was under tight economic blocade by the most developed countries, and that isolated and suffocated its innovation, trade and standard of living. These circumstances also benefited US, as war devastated Europe was in no position to bargain. It is only in the post Cold War world, that US is acting on its own accord, and not taking advantage of favorable external circumstances. That not being the "political habit", brought to the top various "thinkers" with "global" view. From Zbignew Brzezinski's theory of the control of Eurasian landmass, to the neocon revolutionary spread of democracy world wide, to the "war on terrorism", the new pro-active actors are on stage. America is experiencing discomfort, determination to "stay the course", even when wrong, and increasingly relies on chaos to create opporunities for advancing interests. Behind the pro-active elite, stand global corporations, primarily energy. Their interests have become identified with the national inerests. But America has come to the point of having to rethink this. The whole concept has no economic nor political future. Will the traditional American strength again come to the rescue? The ability to learn and self-correct, reinvent and prosper have been the mainstay of American history. But were those only the result of favorable historic circumstances, or indeed the strenght of the system? The times ahead will tell. In the meantime, more regional visibility to regional actors is going to shape our near future. Will Europe be part of that trend? I cannot see how can it stay out. Its economy depends on going global, and typical European navel-gazing exercise will have to be ditched. Leaving provincial, baroque, quaint Europe with some learning to do. Learning how to live with diversity, how to talk to "other" world without giving lectures, and treating them as equals? It may be exciting time for Europe, or it may prove to be too much. If that happens, the Appendix on the great Eurasian body, called Europe, may atrrofie and shrivel.

America was a dream before becoming USA. Besides South America never became USA. So it must have been some common human dream landing out there in Americas and kept growing. Why North part grew up so differently from the South? Both roots were Judeo-Christian and we used to cling up only to Christian predominant image. However it’s much fairer to observe what happened with Jewish independent political development. We remind ourselves that political means basically only share in the complex ownership. We say “America” and the thing is vaguely-finished. But WW I entered only USA and far from her territory. The Americans couldn’t possibly be motivated from Christian spiritual reserves being North or South. So the profit from the victory went to USA in particular – we see now – to Jewish wing of Judeo-Christianity. USA did not join Judeo-Christian Russia in the war with Japan, but joined later in WW I being one-go Jewish policy aligned with induction of – lately nominated as - Russian revolution. WW II was of the same spirit. Russia – absolutely unexpected – won making the turning point for USA to join. Again far, far away from her territory. It went all the way up to “Hiroshima declaration of nuclear human rights” where the Jewish warrior signed its mental pattern of dominance over Christian one. We split forever. Now, Alexey you make nice overview of Lisbon Treaty not forgetting any rationale. But the question is – how we now have to live in view of new coming war? It is so much justifiable worry among the people. They don’t frustrate because being neurotic, they are made as such. The two world wars resulted in profit. My son studied in USA same as you Alexey now and there he learned to apply war as an input on the economic regulatory loop. Why not to make clear – this is the mental view of Jewish inheritance it was never Christian unless…unless the Jewish suffering within Judeo-Christianity joint venture became at some stage – unbearable! It sounds human to me, though remains unknown. But the thing puzzling the world community is who on earth ever managed to solve own tragedy – by making profit? If you kill myself – would your money compensation cover the loss to my family? And what happened with Jewish families? How come they feel so well with so much nuclear stuff around? Healing their souls with making sustained nuclear war with Iran focused to new profits. Do they, the Jews – once being so atomically separated from Christians today – do they really need so much to heal their religious pursuit or – they don’t have any? To end this comment – how will Lisbon Treaty align with the new war?