Brussels, 03/02/2012 (Agence Europe) - Has the EU been able to adapt its foreign policy to the states of the Middle East and North Africa which have recently experienced unprecedented political turmoil? It was to discuss this question that experts of various Brussels-based think tanks met on Tuesday 31 January, for a workshop entitled “An Arab Springboard for EU Foreign Policy?”.
If the answer to this question deserves a few shades of nuance, given the complexity of the events, their country-specific characteristics and the fact that not enough time has elapsed to allow the underlying tendencies to come to the fore, the common factor in all opinions expressed by the experts is that EU foreign policy is still too fragmented and overshadowed by the remnants of its earlier approach. This approach was described by Rosa Balfour, an analyst at the European Policy Centre (EPC), as “post-colonial paternalism” and “donor-beneficiary relationship”. Although it appears clear to those who took part that the EU must change its policy towards the states of Middle East and North Africa, not only in the interests of these countries, but also in its own interests, they also stressed that there are a great many problems.
On the one hand, because the revolutionary explosion which was the “Arab Spring” was so unforeseen, particularly on such a scale, it has been impossible to read the ensuing political dynamics, commented Michael Emerson, a researcher at the Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS). A number of scenarios are taking shape, but it is still impossible to determine with any level of assurance which will win out. The examples of progressive monarchies, such as Morocco and Jordan, via democracy or power being seized by Islamic movements, as in Tunisia, are at the end of the day just a selection of the many options currently taking shape, he stressed. But more worrying still are the cases of Libya, Syria and Yemen, which have been hit by the spectre of civil war. And finally Egypt, whose political chessboard seems to be in perpetual motion, making it impossible to get a snapshot of the current situation and its implications for the future.
On the other, the EU must act with a certain amount of restraint, said Alfredo Conte, head of the strategic planning service of the European External Action Service (EEAS), who was voicing his own opinions. Like Emerson, he stressed that the “Arab Spring” took everybody by surprise and that its concrete implications are still unknown. For this reason, the EU must keep in place a dialogue with all players, in order to preserve a sufficiently broad relationship framework to allow it to hope for considerable influence in the region at a later date. At the same time, he warned that “we must be aware that our influence is limited - it is a realistic hypothesis, not a lack of ambition”.
Although new European instruments have indeed been set in place, such as the political conditionality for aid to be granted, or new tools to boost the fledgeling democracy of the region, Balfour nonetheless feels that it is only since they have been up and running that a judgement can be made on whether or not EU foreign policy needs to be changed. What it is possible to see at this stage is that “the changes are not sufficiently fundamental and continuity is still present, as past interests have not been substantially revised by the EU and its member states", she noted, whilst adding that the representatives of the EU now accept that its policy prior to the “Arab Spring” was “ill-conceived and wrong”. (JK/transl.fl)