Breaking-in period over now. The Belgian Presidency of the Council, which has just begun, will definitively consolidate the EU's institutional structure, resulting from the Lisbon Treaty. The Spanish Presidency, which has just come to an end, was already part of the same legal framework that covered a transition period, during which the new system was just being broken in: Parliament was getting used to its new powers (it did so with gusto and astonishing swiftness); the triple role of Ms Ashton was initially more façade than fact; a permanent president of the European Council had just taken up his job and Mr Van Rompuy had agreed that developments should be somewhat gradual, agreeing with the Spanish Presidency the arrangements that enabled the latter to exercise a number of prerogatives which now return to him.
The breaking-in period is now over. Mr Van Rompuy is beginning to assert himself and the world is beginning to get to know him. The political agreement on the European diplomatic service strengthens the position of Ms Ashton as the president of the Foreign Affairs Council and high representative for external relations (even though, in my opinion, her third role, that of Commission vice-president, requires further clarification). The Parliament is robustly exercising its prerogatives and, for the time being, is displaying an excessive degree of sensitivity, as if it were afraid of being opposed.
Domestic situation in Belgium not proving a problem. In this context, I do not believe that the domestic political situation in Belgium, with its uncertainties regarding the government resulting from the elections, can have a damaging impact on the way in which the EU functions. I would almost say that the contrary is true! Prime Minister Yves Leterme will only have to manage current affairs at a national level and will largely be able to focus on Community issues - and his direct contacts with MEPs prove this. Several ministers from different sectors are doing likewise; so much has already been obtained for the common policies they will be managing.
Mr Leterme even explicitly declared that “we are prepared to limit our role because we need to give room to Herman Van Rompuy and Catherine Ashton in the exercise of their competences. Belgium will have succeeded in its presidency if it allows the EU institutions, especially the new institutions, to function effectively. We want to create a number of different precedents”. We should not interpret these declarations as a minimalist line. The sector councils will need to push important issues forward, which were partly ignored previously, and prepare other essential projects: the new financial perspectives (even if the Commission does not present its document until the autumn); reform of the common agricultural policy and implementation of the “2020 strategy”. Let's not forget that certain dossiers, remaining mainly in the hands of the European Council and Eurogroup will, nonetheless, have to go through the Economy/Finance Council, such as supervision of the financial community and other areas that are evolving significantly: the environment, the freedom and security area, new accessions, trade agreements with third countries, taxation etc. The Belgian Presidency certainly has its work cut out.
A positive development. Obviously, it is easier for Belgium than for the majority of other member states to make the rotating presidency into a mainly functional role. The presidency is, furthermore (or used to be), an opportunity for creating a better understanding in their respective countries of the situation in and importance of Europe, to increase its profile in other member states and to put forward certain national or regional demands. In Belgium, however, Europe has been seen as a living entity on a daily basis for the past half century (let's not forget the nationality of Mr Van Rompuy, former prime minister). Nevertheless, I do believe, all the same, that the current evolution is positive and corresponds to Europe's need for efficiency and visibility in the world. Rotating presidencies are meaningless at a global level and on a European scale an unexpected event is enough to blow the half yearly programmes off-course. The Spanish Presidency was presented, even in Spain, as a semi-failure due to events that had nothing to do with Spain: the Greek crisis, cancellation of the Euro-Mediterranean summit and other unexpected developments. Spain, however, managed a number of delicate situations with efficiency and courage, and obtained considerable results in several areas. These results, however, are largely unknown, even in Spain itself.
In my opinion, the way in which the Belgian Presidency is currently interpreting its role and intends to manage its activity, in support of the new institutional structures' success, is reasonable and will prove positive.
(F.R./transl.fl)