By a 55 per cent majority, Danish voters said "yes" to the Amsterdar Treaty in the May 28 referendum. The population remains as divided on European policy as it has been in all the five referendurns held since Denmark joined the European Community in 1972. Most outstanding, a majority rejected the Maastricht Treaty in 1992, sending shock waves through the Danish and European establishment. This time, 'only" 45 per cent ignored the recommendation of all the so-called responsible parties, all union and employers leaders, and almost all newspapers. This figure Indicates on enormous gap between the electorate and the political establishment and a massive distrust to the political leaders as far as the European Union is concerned.
The four parties recommending a "no" vote - the Socialist Peooles Party and Enhedslisten (Red-Green Alliance) on the left side, and the nationalist Progress Party and Danish Peoples Party on the right - attogether represented only 18 percent of the electorate two months ago.
Social Democracy In particular has always been hit by this contradiction, because in Denmark opposition to the un and social interests. It is mainly workers, who would normally vote for the Social Democrats, who go against the party recommendation and vote In 1993 it was every other Social Democratic voter, and according to the first surveys K'6 45% now. This shows thet the general tendency remains, even though the picture has differed slightly.
Right wing and nationalist forces played a significant role in the campaign against the treaty, The Danish Peoples Party, emerging as the leading far right party during the last year, filled the streets with posters saving "Vote Dan- ON ish, vote No*. Also the biggest daily newspaper, Ekstra Bladet, built an aggressive "no" campaign on a very narrow-minded basis.
At the same time, part of the old left intelligentsia has abandoned its opposition to the European Union and tumed to a "progressive" policy inside the Union framework This tendency is reflected Inside the Socialist Peoples Party whose parliamentary group was divided equally, while the official party line shifted to a "no" this year compared to a 'yes recommendation in 1999 when the Maastricht treaty, including points, was approved in a second referendum. Thus, arguments against the Amsterdam treaty were put fotward from the left as well as the right. Social Democrats insisted that the treaty represented an Improvement in terms of peace, environment and employment but these are generel aims without any Immediate Implications. This tended to favour a debate, not about the social content of the European Union, but about national sovereignty more or ans Union and so on. By a big majority and without any public debate, the Danish parliament voted to sign the Schengen agreement only one month before the referendum. the new treaty, the Schengen agreement and the question of border control became a very important issue during the campaign, The left argued against the creation of supranational bodies without any democratic control, entitled to make a register of *suspicious" citizens, and against the construction of a Fortress Europe directed against Immigrants and refugees, while the right wing focused on the defence of the Danish border.
The "yes" side insisted in the necessity of international co-operation against criminality, Another important issue has been the enlargement of the European Union towards Eastern Europe. For the goverment and the responsible" opposition parties, a yes vate would be the only way to continue the process of enlarsement - not to lose this *historical chance to help these states in their liberatlon from the communist heritage, and so on.
On the no side, most people support the perspective of integrating these states into the EU (except Enhedslisten), but argues that the Amsterdam treaty is not a condition for this but rether an obstacle to a fair and full enlargement of all applying countries.
Finally, much discussion ocused on the possible conseThe 'yes" side argued that Denmark would lose influence or even be more or less excluded from Europe, while "no" arguments varied from "nothing happens, life goes on", to the perspective that Denmark would acain - be at the centre of European debate and have the possibility to start a fresh discussion between free member states. The referendum result was a victory for the government. It has left Prime Minister Poul Nyrup Rasmussen in a comfortable position after two stormy months in Danish politics, On March 12, Social Democracy did much better than expected in the general elections and Rasmussen was re-elected. A few weeks later, a majority of workers rejected the bargaining agreement proposed by union leadership and the employers federation, and went on strike demanding a full sixth week of paid hotiday. After 10 days, the government, together with the right wing opposition, used the law to stop the strike. Despite widespread union disagreement, no serious action was taken in response -mainly because the absence of a left current. inside the unions.
However, new political challenges will come up. The government is not based on a parliamentary majority and will have to negotiate with opposition parties in every major case, Certainly, the European queston will remain at the centre, of the polttical debate and will be put to new referendums, whether because of attempts to abandon the Danish exceptions from the Maastricht treaty (for instance the common currency, or the signing of a new European treaty.