David Cameron doesn't believe it himself. David Cameron's statement on his country's relationship with the EU must not be taken literally. It should not be made into a drama either. It is right and proper that the supporters of a Europe that has political union as its objective reject Cameron's statement vehemently. Guy Verhofstadt is first and foremost among them because the European future painted by the British prime minister, and the casualness with which he has planned deadlines so far into the future, are inadmissible. According to his timetable, the solution to the UK issue would be postponed until 2017! And the Community construction should meanwhile wait and grow weaker! The rejection of the Cameron plan is therefore perfectly logical!
Yet, in my opinion, even its author does not believe it - his message is addressed to his fellow citizens. He can't seriously imagine that the EU is ready to stay immobile while awaiting the London referendum and that the EU would then become a Europe à la carte in which each member state would choose what suited it. The British prime minister has simply chosen the way that allows him both to promise all the guarantees possible to his eurosceptic fellow citizens, while granting them the option of giving their opinion in several years' time. And what about the continental dream of deepening integration? It would just have to wait.
The UK can't leave. In reality, leaving the EU would be an impossible cost for the UK for several reasons. The Americans have practically forced it to stay in the EU by saying - unashamedly - that London has a duty to ensure that the interests of the United States are not ignored in Brussels. The City of London would lose its attraction for transactions in euro, and moreover it has been noted that Germany has already announced that it will transfer the main part of its operations - to Frankfurt in particular. There would no longer be any reasons for continental investors' choice for London. Let's not forget that the initial British refusal to take part in European unity dates back to the time when the Commonwealth was a reality - with Australia and Canada that looked to London more than to Asia or the United States…
While the UK rejects the EU rules, Jacques Delors proposes the correct formula - the UK should leave the EU and conclude a bilateral agreement on free trade and cooperation with it. This idea is rejected by London because it would remove all London's influence on Brussels' decisions - London would only have a say on whether it accepts them afterwards …
The decisive remark. Reactions on the Continent have not, of course, all been as explicit as Guy Verhofstadt's. The European Commission was pleased that David Cameron has said that in principle he is against the UK leaving the EU. The Commission emphasised the positive aspects of Britain being a member (a contribution to the single market, to EU enlargement and to international trade) while leaving aside everything the UK rejects, and not mentioning some extremely important areas from which the UK is already excluded, which - quite apart from the currency - include the Schengen area and the stability pact.
Yet what is especially important is what the EU is supposed to do while waiting for 2017. As Daniel Cohn Bendit said: “We can't have five years of summits and Council meetings blocked and upset by the possibility of exemptions that are founded on the idea of a distant referendum”.
For me, this last remark is decisive. The world of trade and industry is naturally concerned about safeguarding its access to the British market, but this concern is reciprocal - freedom in trade is the top objective on the British side too. And the EU certainly cannot block all the rest in order to wait for Mr Cameron's referendum. The fundamental debates on the political future of Europe are already practically under way and their parallelism with the way the eurozone works is affirmed ever more strongly - and to it supporters even in the UK. Let's not forget of course that the leader of the Union of European Federalists is Andrew Duff.
A case made for domestic consumption. My conclusion is that the now famous speech of David Cameron is a clever case for a domestic audience - a speech in which even its author does not believe. It's a speech that must not block or slow down the progress of European construction or the projects that are under way. Some fundamental decisions will be taken in 2013 - partly even in the coming weeks. The programme is ambitious and arduous, and the cleverness of a speech for domestic consumption will not stop it.
(FR/transl.fl)