A tale of two articles: dunkirk, brussels and the jab wars | thearticle

Soon after the vaccination programme began, this column compared the spirit that inspired it to that of Dunkirk. That spirit is infectious: everyone who receives their jab is invigorated by

the kindness and enthusiasm of the volunteers and NHS staff who have so far inoculated more than 25 million people. The fortunate 1.7 million who have received their second dose are in many

cases old enough to remember the armada of little ships who volunteered to rescue the troops from the beaches nearly 80 years ago. The vaccination campaign has made millions of people feel

proud to be British. What a contrast this cheering picture presents to the mean-spirited hostility emanating from Brussels and other Continental capitals. Yesterday’s extraordinary outburst

from the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, is only the latest expression of a resentful, vengeful attitude towards Britain that can only be explained by envy.  Mrs

von der Leyen could hardly have sounded more aggressive if she had been declaring war: “All options are on the table. We are in the crisis of the century and I’m not ruling anything out

because we have to make sure Europeans are vaccinated as soon as possible.” What makes this statement not merely irritating (the British, too, are Europeans) but ominous, is the implied

threat to cut off supplies. Her language suggests that she is preparing to trigger Article 122 of the European Treaties at a summit of EU leaders next week. That threat was made explicit by

her fellow Eurocrat Charles Michel, President of the EU Parliament. Article 122 would give Brussels emergency powers to confiscate vaccine supplies and manufacturing facilities, deprive

pharmaceutical companies of their intellectual property rights and ban exports to the UK and elsewhere. It has only ever been invoked once: nearly half a century ago, during the oil crisis

of the 1970s. Because it amounts to an indefinite suspension of the rule of law, Article 122 is intended to be a final resort.  These are the kind of draconian powers nation states only

invoke in wartime. With whom is the European Union, then, supposedly at war? The only possible adversary here is Britain. The unenviable predicament in which the EU finds itself is entirely

of its own making. Yet the EU is, in effect, threatening to impose sanctions, with indiscriminate and incalculable effects, on the UK. What is more, many EU member states have made matters

very much worse for themselves by undermining public confidence in the “British vaccine”. The spurious claim that recipients of the Oxford-AstraZeneca jab are at risk of blood clots is

merely the latest canard to be circulated by EU politicians and officials. Those who have cast doubt on the efficacy of this excellent vaccine include President Macron of France and

Chancellor Merkel of Germany. As a result, 17 member states are currently refusing to administer the Oxford vaccine and even those that are doing so have large unused stocks. As Jonathan

Van-Tam, England’s deputy Chief Medical Officer, observed yesterday: “Vaccines don’t save lives if they’re in fridges. They only save lives if they’re in arms.” If antivaxxers had taken over

the chancelleries of Europe, they could not have done a better job of destroying that irreplaceable factor: trust. Even here in Britain, many anxious people have been alarmed by reports of

deaths from blood clots after receiving the jab. The fact that such symptoms are predictable in a handful of people out of many millions vaccinated, without there necessarily being any

causal connection, is a matter of elementary statistical science.  To play to the gallery by spreading panic in the midst of a pandemic is nothing short of criminal. The millions who are

thereby deprived of their jabs are suffering a grievous infringement of their right to life — a right that is enshrined in Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights, to which all

EU member states are signatories. That Article imposes on governments “a positive duty to prevent foreseeable loss of life”. All those EU governments that have stopped administering the

Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine are potentially in breach of that duty. Moreover, Article 2 of the Convention overrides all other legal powers, including the European Treaties. If the invocation

of Article 122 of the EU Treaties were to prevent the British Government from carrying out its duty to prevent foreseeable loss of life here by continuing the vaccination programme, the UK

could bring a case against the EU in the European Court of Human Rights. Such recourse under international law against our neighbours would be unprecedented. Given the gravity and urgency of

the situation, however, the UK would be justified in requesting summary judgment from the court. Simultaneously, the UK should prepare to initiate proceedings against the EU in other

international tribunals.  As Dominic Raab, the Foreign Secretary, commented yesterday: “Frankly, I’m surprised we’re having this conversation. It is normally what the UK and EU team up on to

reject when other countries with less democratic views than our own engage in that kind of brinkmanship.”  Who else could Raab have in mind but Putin’s Russia, which has carried out

assassinations on our soil? The UK has been joined by the EU and the US to impose sanctions in retaliation for such conduct. Indeed, Joe Biden did not mince his words this week when asked if

he thought Putin was a killer. “Uh-huh, I do,” the President replied. Does Ursula von der Leyen consider the UK to be in the same category as Putin’s Russia, to be sanctioned merely for

abiding by human rights and international law? If the EU is going to apply sanctions to Britain in peacetime under Article 122, it will forfeit any right to be considered an organisation

governed by the rule of law. Denying people their lawful right to be vaccinated is both illegal and lethal. Invoking Article 122 against the UK would be a hostile act. Friends do not behave

like this — only foes. The British may have more need of the Dunkirk spirit than we could possibly have imagined. A MESSAGE FROM THEARTICLE _We are the only publication that’s committed to

covering every angle. We have an important contribution to make, one that’s needed now more than ever, and we need your help to continue publishing throughout the pandemic. So please, make a

donation._