Difficult “dual message”. At the outset, the dominating feature of the European Council should have been the signing of the treaty on the governance of the economic and monetary union. Priorities have, however, changed and the message heads of state and government want to send out on Friday has become dual: alongside discipline, economic recovery, each with the same degree of priority and importance. The aim is, then, to make clear that austerity is not the only prospect for Europe. This dualism is not an easy ask, however. Discipline is there for all, not just Greece, to see - most states are implementing austerity policies to restore budgetary balance - whereas economic recovery is still at the stage of projects and intentions.
The assessments and stock-taking have proved that poor management, abuses and waste were real in a large number of member states, so that, ultimately, putting things back in order will be good for everyone. The efforts and sacrifices are right now, however. The tension between what the authorities deem essential and what a large section of the people is prepared to accept is great. Several member states are in the run-up to elections, which can only exacerbate the rivalry and differences between political views, sometimes with a certain fudging of reality. An attempt to clarify some of what is at stake and to reinstate a number of truths may be of value.
Is the new treaty necessary? Not everyone is for it. Several MEPs, led by Sylvie Goulard and Daniel Cohn-Bendit, take the view that the requirements in terms of eurozone discipline are already set out in the texts on European governance (Six Pack) which have already been passed or are in the process of being approved. Guy Verhofstadt has also made the same point, though putting greater emphasis on growth than on discipline. We are getting there, even if a little late. According to Pervenche Berès, who chairs the European Parliament social affairs committee, this treaty will be “disastrous for the future of the European economy and employment, and condemns the eurozone to austerity”.
This treaty, some analyses say, owes more to Ms Merkel's political demand that there be a formal pact which, for her own country's parliament and public opinion, has greater visibility than a raft of regulations which are never referred to on television or in the non-specialist press.
The new treaty cannot be re-negotiated. The intention to re-negotiate the new treaty after it has been signed has been voiced, for example, by certain political forces in France, with arguments that do not stand up to scrutiny. The reservations of the United Kingdom and the Czech Republic (two countries which have not signed it and will not, therefore, have to approve it) and the hypothetical hesitations of other states over ratification have been highlighted, totally ignoring the rules for its coming into effect. The new treaty will come into force as soon as it has been ratified by 12 member states of the eurozone, and everything suggests that this threshold will very quickly be passed. Thereafter, any country which does not ratify the treaty, in practice, leaves the zone.
This is a hypothesis that some do not rule out for Greece and, at times, for this or that other small country, but it is not a possibility for most of the eurozone.
Not to be forgotten. (a) The EU is tightening discipline in the world of finance through a sizeable series of provisions (short-selling and other points); (b) we continue to read and hear that Greece may be “forced out of Europe”, thereby confusing EU and eurozone - this is clearly tosh: whatever happens, Greece will remain in the EU, no one has ever considered that it should leave; on the contrary, it is receiving more aid than any other member state, and further support with eased procedures and conditions is being prepared; (c) monitoring of the use of European funding is being improved, and the war on waste and fraud becoming ever more fierce.
Lustreless summit. The various remarks and clarifications above do nothing to change the impression that this European Council does not raise much enthusiasm and will not resonate with public opinion. Demonstrations are expected, but these are of protest. Indeed, efforts to push economic recovery initiatives were already at the centre of the previous summit, with no great effect.
Will it be necessary to await the relaunch of federalist projects for the European spirit to recover its confidence and popularity?
(FR/transl.rt)