An outdated instrument. The European Parliament's attempt to boost cooperation between the EU and the whole Mediterranean region was a failure, in my opinion. There was no operational decision, no outlook for the future, and virtually no media coverage or echo in public opinion. I am talking about the meeting of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Union for the Mediterranean (UfM) which took place in Brussels last Thursday and Friday.
The UfM is the oldest of the countless abbreviations defining relations between the European Union and the non-European Mediterranean countries. It was created in 2008 under bad auspices - according to the initial draft, which was of French origin, only the European countries bordering the Mediterranean could participate in it - not the EU as a whole. Once this point had been corrected and Barcelona had been chosen for the headquarters, the UfM embarked on a long period of lethargy. Nothing whatsoever on the EU's specific relations with the countries of the Arab Spring and other countries of the same area, like Morocco or Algeria. What is more, EUROPE 10825 had already given clear account of the uncertainties about the effectiveness of the UfM and the vanity of the whole project in bringing together an impressive number of countries and theoretically dealing with everything - the UfM compiled reports on economic, cultural, environmental and energy issues, as well as on the role of women, while everyone knows that, in most of these areas, the positions and interests of the Mediterranean countries differ from one country to another and are sometimes even incompatible. Palestine and Israel each have a place in the co-presidency of the UfM - but it is certainly not in this framework that their differences will be settled. It often happens that on one subject or another no position is agreed by the bodies of this bizarre union because of the lack of agreement between the extra-European countries.
The approaches, interests, mindsets and history are also different on the European side, since the third countries of the Adriatic - Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia and Montenegro - should be added to the EU and its member states. This sea is part of the Mediterranean, which further complicates the picture.
Recognised uncertainties. The situation described above results in the work of the Parliamentary Assembly of the UfM not even attracting the interest of those that are part of it, and its deliberations carry virtually no clout. The president of the European Parliament, Martin Schulz, deplored the lack of interest of the governments on both shores of the Mediterranean and he used the conditional when talking about the future - IF the parliaments represent the new source of legitimacy in the Arab world, then this assembly that unites them with the European parliaments must be the new source of legitimacy of the renewed Euro-Mediterranean relations. We are far from this. And the recommendation approved by the Assembly can be summarised in a kind of wish list - to bring the policies of the member states into step with the needs of the peoples, to make the national parliaments financially autonomous, and to guarantee freedom and human rights everywhere. And it goes on - to set up tangible projects for renewable energy, to make the Mediterranean solar plan concrete, to create protected under-water parks, and even to launch a Euro-Mediterranean television channel in several languages. The whole thing seems to be as realistic and effective as the statements of Mrs Ashton after a tragedy, which she condemns with severity. And as usual, there is of course a call for specific EU funding.
Not in touch with reality. I do not believe that the UfM is in touch with reality. The region is experiencing dramatic conflicts, and the EU is directly involved in issues like the ownership and management of maritime energy resources, the supply of arms to rebel forces in Syria (personally, I hope that the embargo will be mostly maintained), budgetary support to the Arab Spring countries, and border control in the face of influxes of illegal immigrants. What is more, several of these matters relate more to the member states than to the Community institutions. And let's not forget that the Community budget has limits and that the EU is trying to focus its resources on tangible projects that are useful for it and for the relevant third countries, rather than on shows of putting on a front.
This column will return to these budgetary issues.
(FR/transl.fl)