Market matters
Sir: Ernst Albert (September 9) is fundamentally wrong in believing that Britain may not withdraw honourably from the Common Market. Much of his article is spent in sound criticism of the dangers of the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty as it now exists, all of which I accept unreservedly. Very mistakenly, however, he confuses parliamentary sovereignty with national sovereignty. Even if Parliament were limited by some form of entrenched law, withdrawal would still be possible. Whilst ultimate governmental responsibility is to a power within the state, that state will be absolutely sovereign; except it be motivated by exemplary philanthropy, it will do the best for itself by means of deceit, violence and alliance. This natural and unalterable condition of international relations precludes any concept of international law.
Two benefits can accrue from alliance: prosperity or power, or more often, both. Regardless of high flown preambles, there is no question of a izeaty being able to bind an unwilling partner. A treaty will last only for so long as it serves both or all signatories. Therefore all nations have a great and glorious_ history of breaking treaties, none less than perfidious Albion which only last year manifestly failed to protect those poor little islands in the Persian Gulf, to whom we were bound by treaty, from blatant Iranian aggression.
Power not law determines the course of international affairs.
C. N. Jordan 41 Scotton Street, Wye, Kent.
Previous page
