Overall implications of the project. Will the negotiations on the creation of a close and permanent partnership between the EU and the USA be able to take place and be concluded within the timeframe planned - in other words, by the end of next year? We are beginning to have doubts. The obstacle that, at first sight, was the hardest (the difference of opinion between France and most other countries of the EU on the cultural sector) has - in principle - been overcome. Yet the general climate remains rather sceptical about the whole project - indeed, rather indifferent.
The compromise on the cultural sector continues to arouse uncertainty and to monopolise all the attention - overshadowing the project's political significance and its global economic effects. The creation of thousands of jobs, a surge in business in Europe estimated at €119 billion per year, €545 additional income per family of four living in Europe - these figures (which are approximations) don't seem able to arouse public opinion. To start off with, the significance of the project needs to be clarified.
The political significance can be summarised in a few lines. The starting point was the impression that the USA was focusing its attention on the Pacific Ocean and its neighbouring countries (with China apart, as China is more a creditor and adversary for the USA than a partner that the USA seeks out), while ignoring the Atlantic. History and the economy oblige Europe to restore the balance - its links with the USA are too deep to be ignored or forgotten.
The economic significance is just as evident. The USA and Europe are in a position to deepen their cooperation and to respect common disciplines. The objective is not simply the removal of customs duties (which are very moderate at 3% on average) but to extend the cooperation to services, investment and public procurement - through the radical harmonisation of standards and regulations. Bilateral trade should increase by nearly 30% and the additional jobs in the EU are estimated at 400,000 in a few years' time - not to mention later developments. When up against the developing countries, Europe is too small not to tighten its links with the USA.
Compromise on cultural sector debated. In reality, this twofold motivation for the project got engulfed by the dispute on the cultural sector - which still partly continues because of the differences of opinion in interpreting the compromise that was reached. In the view of France and a few other countries, the situation is simple - the cultural sector in its widest sense is excluded from the negotiation with the USA and unanimity is required to change this exclusion. The French minister for culture, Aurélie Filippetti, has confirmed that her response under any circumstances will be negative.
The interpretation of the designated negotiator, European Commissioner Karel De Gucht, is more subtle. Putting the legal details to one side, De Gucht's position is based on the concern to avoid the Americans asking - in return for cultural exclusion - for other sectors that are of key importance for Europe to be kept out of the negotiation. Mr De Gucht wants to have all the weapons available to be able to negotiate effectively. That's why he believes that his mandate must not prevent him from responding to American questions on the cultural sector, too - while explaining to the USA that he needs unanimous consensus from the Council in order to make these questions the subject of negotiation. I won't go into this debate too deeply as EUROPE has already reported on it widely. The debate resulted in Mr De Gucht interrupting his short stay in Tuscany in order to participate personally in the protracted late-night discussions in Brussels.
The dispute grew bigger and came to include famous personalities from the world of cinema and theatre - personalities to whom public opinion, of course, listened. General attention therefore became focused on this aspect, overshadowing the overall significance of the project - with its economic and political implications for Europe. Any outburst from a popular actor or famous film director of course crushes the efforts (of this column and others) to make known the importance of this project for our small Europe and creates difficulties for tightening all Europe's links with the USA on an equal footing and in the mutual interest.
Maybe the French reluctance actually has a more wide-ranging nature… This file would become more complicated if it was confirmed in France that the “culture” file really implies a general reluctance to the opportunity to tighten links between Europe and the USA. The dispute would then take on another meaning and another importance. I will return to this tomorrow.
(FR/transl.fl)