EU at 50

“Don’t let yourself be fooled,” is EU Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson’s message to American voters. In an interview for BBC’s Hardtalk, which was excerpted to the Financial Times, Mandelson argues that promising disengagement from certain parts of the global trading system in order to win votes is dangerous. Implicitly critiquing views expressed by Democratic Presidential hopefuls Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, he said “It is irresponsible to be pretending to people you can erect new protection, new tariff barriers around your economy in this 21st century global age and still succeed in sustaining living standards and jobs. It is a mirage and they know it.”

Mrs. Clinton made headlines earlier in the year saying that she would renegotiate the North American Free Trade agreement, once signed by her husband in an effort to protect American jobs. Both Senator Obama and Clinton have said they would “punish” China by supporting a bill that would introduce trade tarriffs on the country, to compensate for an undervalued Yuan Renmibi.

To this Mandelson says: “”It is very irresponsible in my view to pretend to people that we can disengage from international trade, we can create barriers around our economy and then be surprised when people retaliate by doing the same,” he said. “It is going to lead us into a vicious spiral of beggar-thy-neighbour policies which will take us decades back in terms of trade growth.”

The EU Trade Commissioner is undoubtedly worried about whether or not he can count on Democrate assurances that upon the election of a President from its ranks the difficult (and thus far unsuccessful) Doha Trade Round negotiations would not be threatened.

Angela Merkel, German Chancellor, received Europe’s most prestigious honor on May 1: the international Charlemagne Prize. Previous winners include US President Bill Clinton, former EU Commission President Jacques Delors, Luxembourg’s Prime Minister Jean-Claude Juncker and Europe’s “Mr. Foreign Policy,” Javier Solana. None other than French President Nicolas Sarkozy delivered the laudatory address - an interesting choice, given the often fraught relationship between the two that has had some commentators pointing to a notable cooling in the once so warm Franco-German relations.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, Sarkozy spent a good portion of his time basking in the glory of his own rhethoric and professing his “love” for Angela Merkel (in what was almost the political equivalent of Tom Cruise’s couch jumping episode).

Ahead of the French Presidency of the European Union, which begins on July 1, President Sarkozy is trying to portray himself and his agenda in the right (spot)light. Attempting to borrow from Germany’s EU diplomatic toolkit, he has sent his immigration minister, Brice Hortefeux, on a whistle-stop tour of the European capitals in an attempt to forge a compromise on this tenuous policy area, much like the German Chancellor was able to craft an early agreement on environmental policy.

Most recently, he is working toward reminding everyone of his importance in the European construct by withdrawing his support for Tony Blair as the first long-term President of the European Union (following the changes agreed in the Lisbon Reform Treaty). The story is interesting for its potential tactical significance, as it was Sarkozy who first mentioned Blair as a contender when discussions on possible candidates arose a few months ago. Today, member states pencilled in first “substantive” talks about who might assume the bloc’s top job for a summit in Brussels on June 19-20. Sarkozy now argues, there can only be two serious contenders for the job: Luxembourg’s Prime Minister, Jean-Claude Juncker and current EU Commission President Barroso. But analysts believe that Sarko has not completely dropped Blair from his bracket, and wants to side with whichever candidate looks the most promising as his own Presidency of the Union evolves so that he then can be seen as “king maker”. For now, Sarkozy has ruled Blair out for failing to introduce the Euro and negotiating a series of opt-outs that took Britain further away from the Union, rather than fulfilling his one-time campaign promise, to put his country back into “the heart of Europe.”

The nomination for the EU President and for all subsequent key roles created by the Lisbon Reform Treaty will surely be a new chapter in mature Union diplomacy and extremely interesting to watch. What all EU players need, however, for this process to have its democratic legitimacy (however small), is a resounding “Yes” vote in the Irish referendum on the new Treaty. EU citizens, meanwhile, still want a high-profile figure as the first official “head” of the EU-27 - someone with global clout - and here early surveys are pointing to none other than Tony Blair. For the first time in a long time it looks as if actual EU policy (as opposed to member state haggling) could get interesting - and perhaps even a little dirty.

Wolfgang Ischinger, the designated head of the Munich Security Conference, former German Ambassador to the US currently serving as his country’s top diplomat in the UK, has published an article in the Financial Times arguing that now - not after the US elections - is the time to forge stronger transatlantic ties. A rare opportunity is emerging to set the agenda on future EU-US relations due to the confluence of two key events in 2009: the inauguration of a new US President and the entry into force of the Lisbon Reform Treaty. Each of these events will give both sides new figureheads, as the new EU Treaty foresees the creation of a permanent presidency (for a two-and-a-half year term) of the 27-member bloc (see my earlier entry on this issue). The hope is, of course, that a high-profile figure will at least superficially solve the age-old question attributed to Henry Kissinger: “Who do I call when I want to talk to Europe?”

Ties between the allies have been tenuous at best throughout the two-term Bush Presidency. The Iraq war drove a stake through the heart of the Union, with Spain and the UK deploying troops and Germany and France fronting the anti-invasion coalition. During the first Bush administration the two regular semi-annual US-EU Summits were cut to one, further reducing necessary ‘face time’ between diplomats on both sides.

Thus, while the second term of the Bush administration has been about ironing out diplomatic creases between the US and European allies, the relationship could surely be more productive in light of the global challenges: instability in Iraq and Afghanistan, a volatile situation throughout the Middle East, natural catastrophes caused by global warming, instability on the world financial markets.

Aside from the future EU President who won’t take office before 2009, it will be up to Nicolas Sarkozy, President of the country most critical of US military plans for Iraq (the decision which prompted the American side to begin consuming “Freedom Fries” and dismissing the French as “Cheese-eating surrender monkeys”) to forge closer ties as the issues the EU should begin to tackle now - not later- to prove to the US that the bloc is serious about reaffirming its commitment to transatantic relations.

In the piece, Ischinger argues that Europe must enhance its military engagement around the world, by building the kind of military capacity necessary in a world of modern conflict. Implicitly, he is criticizing the work of the European Defence Agency, designed precisely for the purpose of finding more functional solutions toward crisis prevention while coordinating the actual military capabilities (i.e. the coordination of weapons development and procurement) of the EU Member States. Granted, the EDF, which has been around a mere three years has a difficult and challenging role, particularly since it is not designed to produce short-term effects, but rather create a coordination mechanism, which will facilitate and accelerate a European response to certain situations. This will take time, but it is a major improvement to the intergovernmental mess that was European Security and Defence Policy after the Amsterdam Treaty. To not mention it, is to ignore its important contribution to long-term improved relations with both the US and with NATO.

Which brings us to Ischinger’s second point: The EU and US must resolve questions on the future of NATO. Just how difficult this will be is evidenced by the NATO Summit in Bucharest earlier this month. How Europe is to offer a solution to that situation in a matter of months is still somewhat a mystery to me, given the tight-rope walk that was the last summit. Certainly, however, the US has got to stop offering membership to countries that counteract certain priorities of the European Neighbourhood Policy. Closer coordination between the EU members of NATO and the US is thus undoubtedly needed.

Ischinger also wants to see the EU pull the US over to its side with respect to robust plans toward reducing the harmful effects of global warming and reaffirming the “western” values, which dismiss torture and advocate dialogue in addressing the issue of radical Islam and terrorism. Here Ischinger is undoubtedly right - the EU is one of the leading players in the actual reduction of green-house gases and has businesses which have clearly seen the light with respect to their competitive advantage. Going green is becoming a huge future business sector for Europe, and that is an angle, which could be played in discussions in which the US has continually pointed to the negative business effects of increased environmental legislation.

Europe and the US could profit immensely from a closer exchange of experience not solely on intelligence and security information with respect to the global spread of terrorism (this is already onoing), but means of reaching out to communities most likely to become subjected to radical Islam and its negative consequences. Transatlantic dialogue on this issue must be stepped up on all levels - government and non-government.

For more on Ischinger’s views on the future of the EU-US relationship and Russia’s role in the world, you can watch an interview with the Financial Times’ foreign affairs editor Quentin Peel here.