Strasbourg, 11/05/2011 (Agence Europe) - At a time when neighbouring countries are affirming their aspirations to obtain freedom, the Union needs a common foreign policy and diplomacy more than ever. This affirmation was made by the president of the European Parliament, Jerzy Buzek, at the beginning of the debate on foreign, security and defence policy. It was also confirmed by Catherine Ashton, the Union High Representative. The challenges are indeed significant but they are, “chances we can't afford to miss”. Ashton highlighted the, “mixed record of Europe's empire” and said humility was needed when calling for democracy in other countries. She distinguished between “deep democracy and surface democracy”. The former goes beyond elections and implies good institutions and a change of mindset. The latter will not survive if deep democracy does not have roots. Among some of the obstacles Catherine Ashton mentions are religious intolerance, which plays on fear and violates one crucial aspect of fundamental human rights.
What can Europe do? It “deplores, commends, urges” but it can also apply sanctions (such as those imposed yesterday against 13 members of the Syrian regime) and demand access for citizens who need humanitarian assistance. Catherine Ashton hammered home the fact that what had happened in Syria is not the result of a “foreign conspiracy”, it is a demand for change by the Syrian people and if this regime does not realise this, it is putting its own legitimacy into question. The High Representative was greeted by much applause from the assembly when she made this statement. This contempt for democracy is the reason why targeted sanctions had been made against the authorities in Belarus, which would be accompanied by greater efforts to help civil society.
The Union can also choose “direct engagement” in cases where a high level of unity is required. In her recent meetings in Iraq, Yemen and Bahrain, Ashton protested against human rights violations and argued against the death penalty.
The case of Libya is a special case because, as Ashton underlined, it shows, “how far we have come but also how far we still have to go”. Humanitarian assistance is required but the High Representative also pointed out that, “sometimes only the military have the equipment and the people to help”. She also said that it was important to take action quickly and share information and improve cooperation (particularly with NATO, which had happened for the very first time, she pointed out). Catherine Ashton confirmed that Gaddafi had to quit and the regime had to change but that they needed to prepare for the future: elections, a constitution, reforms and border security. Missions have been sent to Libya, dialogue with regional organisations has begun and the Commission is seeking to open an office in Benghazi. She also said that the link between money and human rights (“silver thread”) had to be included in all these initiatives.
The High Representative said that at a general level, they needed to revise the concept of neighbourhood policy, which should be based on, “three 'Ms': mobility, markets and money”. She said that they should not forget that they had a role to play in these young societies but that mobility and access to the markets are also very important aspects to members of the Union. She pointed out that money, or rather, better use of “resources” had to be used to give new impetus to countries like Tunisia, which had seen a total collapse in income generated by tourism. This is important to Tunisia. Ashton insisted that they needed a long-term strategy but also had to look at providing immediate aid, particularly with regard to tackling budget deficits.
In Egypt, the High Representative met a woman candidate in the presidential elections and who had projects for construction and infrastructure - the Union has to help transform these plans into reality.
Catherine Ashton pointed out that the new EEAS had to help towards preventing conflict. In this context, she underlined the need to convince Bosnian leaders to think of their country and not just their respective communities. She also said that she was convinced that negotiations remained the only way forward for Israel and Palestine. Remarkable progress had been made in state-building in Palestine but the situation remained awful, she said. Ashton said that the Israelis had to agree to transfer tax revenue to the Palestinians.
Catherine Ashton concluded that citizens revolting against tyranny had to understand that democracy is not just about choosing a government but also about dismissing it. She said that in this respect it is not just about saying hello but also about being able to say goodbye.
EP groups demand tougher action on Syria. The president of the EPP, Joseph Daul, said that the Lisbon Treaty provided Europe with the possibility of speaking with a single voice in the field of foreign policy and that it should resolutely reject the inter-governmental method. Daul would like, “2011 to be the year for the new neighbourhood policy and for fighting terrorism and establishing peace in the Middle East”. The president of the S&D group, Martin Schulz, said that despite the Lisbon Treaty, he wanted to know what the real role of the Union was in international policy and how much credibility it had. He also wanted to know how Europe could ask for Gaddafi to leave, while at the same time member states were exporting arms to this country. In response to the three “Ms” of Catherine Ashton, he said that he preferred the three “Cs”: coherency, concrete (policy) and the Community method. At the end of the debate, Ashton said that she also liked the three “Cs”. The president of the ALDE group, Guy Verhofstadt, wanted to know what the EU was offering countries that needed similar aid packages to the Marshall Plan. He is calling for aid to be directed to the budgets of these countries and/or the cancellation of their debts. Verhofstadt criticised the Union's “reaction” when faced with the, “enormity of the Syrian disaster”. He said that the whole Assad family should be sanctioned. Whilst he was not originally in favour of setting up the EEAS, Charles Tannock (ECR) supports a fair approach and would like the service to succeed, whilst taking into account the misgivings of member states when difficult decisions would need to be made. The president of the Greens/EFA, Daniel Cohn-Bendit, declared that no solution is possible without Assad leaving: if certain member states are against this they should be exposed, just as those that say that Israel should not pay tax revenues to the Palestinians, should be exposed too. Speaking on behalf of the GUE/United Left, Lothar Bisk called on leaders in the Union to forget about thinking about military options but rather defend the right of all to a dignified life, with all the material necessities that this implies.
At the end of the debate, Catherine Ashton provided assurances that pressure would be maintained on Syria and that this week they would be examining the possibility of expanding the raft of sanctions against the country.
The position of the rapporteurs. An improvement in the quality of the Union's foreign policy is required, following the introduction of the Lisbon Treaty: the rapporteur the Council's annual foreign policy report, Gabriele Albertini (EPP), appealed for all the new instruments to be used in action where the Parliament and Commission should be acting as better allies.
A more proactive line was also requested by Roberto Gualtieri (S&D), the rapporteur on post-Lisbon defence and security policy. Gualtieri would particularly like to see a European political initiative being taken with regard to Libya, which aimed to establish a ceasefire and negotiations. In his opinion, military intervention by NATO in the region is not the solution and that the case of Libya cruelly demonstrated to what extent European military capability is not matched by appropriate military budgets. He said that the potential of the EEAS was very significant and that it should indeed be utilised.
Maria Muniz de Urquiza (S&D), the rapporteur on relations with the Union and international organisations, appealed for the role of the Union on the global stage to be re-defined. She said that this was a difficult task due to be very large number of existing bilateral treaties (around 250). She said that first of all they should tackle the question whilst avoiding the temptation to renationalise the issue, and by introducing as much efficiency is possible.
“Strengthened cooperation” required in CFSP and unanimity rule should be ended. Andrew Duff (ALDE, United Kingdom) reminded Ashton that even if Common Foreign and Security Policy remained subject to the unanimity rule, saying: “ the Lisbon Treaty allows you to form coalitions of the willing and launch some kind of reinforced cooperation...My advice to you: find some avant-garde states to forge a core group of political willing states to work with them to forge a common foreign policy”. Franziska Brantner (Greens, Germany) urged Ashton to “dare more… and set its own agenda” in EU foreign policy and not just say what some of the bigger member states wanted to hear. The German MEP asked, “what is your personal position on Syria? According to you, should president al-Assad be included on the list of individuals subject to sanctions or not? Say what you think!” Brantner also warned the High Representative, “do not count on the member states to save you. The member states are not a guarantee to keep you in your job”. Véronique de Keyser (PES, Belgium) also called on Ashton to be more daring and more independent from the member states, as well as for her to put her own imprint on foreign policy. This sentiment was also echoed by Elmar Brok (EPP). The European Parliament understands the difficult position of the High Representative and is prepared to help her carry out her respective functions but it also expects Ashton to take things in hand, he said. “Take control of EU foreign policy, exercise political leadership and convince reticent member states”, exclaimed Brok. His colleague at the EPP, Jacek Saryusz-Wolski from Poland, said, “We wanted a HR to lead not to follow the member states”.
Alexander Graff Lambsdorff (ALDE, Germany) said that the EU is far from having a common foreign and security policy worthy of the name. He did, however, insist that this was not primarily the fault of Ashton, “but of the member states that lack the political will”. He said that the unanimity rule was paralysing the CFSP and that they needed to move forward and revise the decision-making rules in this field. (L.G./H.B.trans/fl)