Let's not over-dramatise regrets or criticism. Europe has given such unflinching support to the burgeoning freedom and democracy growing on the southern side of the Mediterranean (partly out of remorse for the previous line it had taken) that it must avoid over-dramatising the criticism and regrets regarding the results from the first free elections that did not coincide with what it would have wished. These countries have cast their vote and made their choice. The EU must now define its relations with the new elected authorities and discuss the agreements it needs to be concluded with them. The time for congratulations and rhetoric is now in the past, as is the time for moaning or punctiliously weighing up how far the choices made by the people correspond to our own tastes or expectations.
Certain responses have been both naïve and excessive. I quote Jean Daniel, not only for the role he has played and his past, but also because he was born in Algeria. He completely collapsed and described what has happened as a counterrevolution: “This is the final whistle that has legally been blown by the people themselves to the revolution that they had invented and which shone like springtime throughout the Arab world (…) In Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood have welcomed the fact that their Tunisian brothers have advanced their own cause. The Libyans have confirmed the theocratic character of their future government”. He is also disappointed with the way in which Tunisian émigrés in France voted: “How can you explain how men and women who have chosen to live in a country other than her own, and who have often integrated in it and sometimes put roots down there, can elect leaders in their countries of origin who are the antithesis of the spirit of their adopted country? How can women who have benefited from the protection of laws on all different levels not want these same laws to be applied in their countries of birth?”
Other commentaries are more general in tone. Here are a few meaningful words which have been chosen a little at random: - Far from Tunis, Tunisia remains, in its innermost depths, an Arab-Muslim country. - From its popular fervour, Islam animates both the private and collective life of all Arab peoples. - Libya and its non-state will experience its adventure in very critical conditions that exacerbate the whirl of the tribes, the black gold of oil and the surge of weapons. Egypt will see its power fought over between the army and the Muslim Brotherhood.
More optimistic considerations. Some forecasts, however, are less radical and frightening. Some observers have underlined the fact that, in reality, almost half of all Tunisians voted for secular parties, which would indicate that Tunisia and, in its wake, other Arab countries (this generalisation might be pushing it a bit) are ultimately “in the throes of escaping from the alternative of either tyrants or bearded fanatics”. It has also been emphasised that countries from the Arab Spring chose the ballot box instead of bombs.
Reciprocal commitments. I have used lots of quotes from other people in an effort to demonstrate that I am not taking a position in favour of one or other of the two theories. The EU as a whole should not judge whether these countries have voted correctly or not but, rather, define its relations with them (and also with other countries from the same area) on clear and objective criteria. With regard to the financial aspect, I suggest that this column from yesterday be consulted. It should not be forgotten that the exercise in assessing the effectiveness and use of European aid (currently taking place at the Council, see EUROPE 10491) should also cover the Arab world. For the other aspects, the fundamental principle should be the reciprocity of commitments, which means the same degree of freedom and rights, particularly with regard to religious issues, the free movement of persons, freedom of the press, respect for human rights, with particular attention to women's' rights: gender equality, a ban on polygamy and corporal punishment etc. If this reciprocity is not forthcoming, the EU would not, in my opinion, be able to conclude general agreements but only limited arrangements that cover one or other area of cooperation, such as student exchanges and other operational projects. All of this should be done transparently. It should not be forgotten that it was illegal immigrants from Tunisia that provoked the Schengen area crisis, with repercussions that have still not been totally overcome. The rules and conditions for immigration must be respected by both sides.
Autonomous reliability. It is obvious that on the domestic level the EU will retain the rights that it recognises for immigrants, as well as its rules for reception. However, if reciprocity is not forthcoming, it will carry this out autonomously, without any contractual commitments. And in the concept of reciprocity, among the red lines that should not be crossed, Alain Juppé has also included changeovers between the political parties and the conditions for aid: “the more democratic precepts are respected, the more EU assistance will be put into practice”. The different Arab peoples have made their choices in total freedom and will continue to do so, but the EU must respect its principles. (FR/transl.fl)