For the European Union, the summer break has, this year once again, offered little in the way of respite. It would be very odd if it were any other way: the EU is a living body politic, a sort of twenty-eight headed Hydra, with the one that is currently engaged in cutting itself off among the more active over the last few weeks. We can always count on a few stories, often baneful, sometime frankly depressing.
This summer, among the stories were the crisis over the fipronil-tainted eggs which, spreading out from Belgium and the Netherlands 18 years after the dioxin crisis, highlighted above all that food safety would always remain at the mercy of the financial greed of those who worship the golden calf. Unsurprisingly, there were stories from Hungary and Poland governed by leaders whose commitment to EU values is inversely proportional to the amount of funding the Union allocates them.
In similar vein, the Turkey of president Erdoğan took a few more steps away from Europe. The incursion into the German electoral campaign was enough, on its own, to show the Ankara autocrat someone to be avoided and make it more regrettable than ever that an agreement was concluded with him to stem, in return for a ransom payment, the flow of refugees. Finally, of course, there is the distressing Brexit saga which, week after week throughout the summer, continued to dismay all reasonable people on both sides of the Channel (see EUROPE 11853).
These are all issues that will need to be discussed soon. But, for the moment, let us remain a little longer with two countries which, both being Mediterranean, are among the favourite holiday destinations – France and Italy. On 29 August, at the annual conference of France’s ambassadors in Paris, Emmanuel Macron stated loud and clear that what had to be done was to “rebuild an ambitious and protective Europe” (see EUROPE 11851). He is absolutely correct. And yet? Exactly what Europe is the young French head of state speaking about? The question is a reasonable one as this summer has shown what is said, for the most part, to be distinctly at variance with what is done.
At the end of July, did not this same President Macron take the sovereign decision temporarily to nationalise the Saint Nazaire shipyards to prevent them falling into the capitalist grasp of the state-owned Italian group Fincantieri? The official line given was that the Elysée was worried that Europe’s largest shipbuilder, which has also entered into cooperation agreements with the Shanghai-based China State Shipbuilding Corporation, might one day pass on French know-how – in particular, military – to China or that, in the event of an economic downturn, might make cuts among the 7,000 French jobs rather than touch those in Italy. For some of France’s passionate supporters, of both Left and Right, of economic patriotism, this nationalisation made sound sense. But is it really, given that the shipyards in question used to be called STX France and that they had been put up for sale after their owner went bust – that owner being the South Korean conglomerate STX? How can the state-owned Italian company possibly represent a greater threat to the “strategic interests” of France?
In Italy, the French decision was taken as a slap on the face. With good reason. It is never pleasant for a country to see one of its economic jewels fall under foreign control. A Belgian daily dared to use the headline “Générale bank under the jackboot” (with all its overtones of fascism) when Carlo De Benedetti tried to take over the Société générale de banque in the 1980s. The sought-after Générale was ultimately taken by the French Suez group. Italian reactions over the summer were in keeping: former president of the European Commission and of the Italian Council Romano Prodi scoffed at the schizophrenic of a France which “has already bought up half of Italy”. Though somewhat of an exaggeration, the point is not totally incorrect, certainly as far as luxury goods are concerned. More measured though no less dismissive, ministers Pier Carlo Padoan (Finance) and Carlo Calenda (Economic Development) properly pointed out that “nationalism and protectionism are unacceptable between two large European countries”, going to argue: “What is needed is confidence and mutual respect”. They are right, except that confidence and mutual respect are needed between all the member countries of the European Union, no matter how large or small.
Therein lies the crux of the problem posed by President Macron’s decision. As Adriana Cerretelli put it in the editorial of Il Sole 24 Ore of 27 July, the decision by the Elysée to nationalise the shipyards “reveals an old side of France with its authoritarian, state control, protectionist and sovereignist instincts”. To put it another way, the decision is an indication of a return to a certain French arrogance, prepared to commit to the European dimension only if it can be in charge. It is also, no doubt, an indication of the return of an old temptation: that of running Europe through a Franco-German directorate without bothering about the concerns and interests of the other member states.
This temptation could be seen, in France, in the refusal to accede to the request from Italy to open its ports to migrants. It was even clearer in the decision by Paris to play the go-between with Libyan factions without consulting Italy which historically has the best understanding of its former colony. It can be seen at times in Germany, too: for example, when claims are stealthily put down for the post of president of the European Central Bank even though German nationals are at the helm of the multitude of bodies that govern the economic and financial affairs of the EU and the euro area.
All of these are indications of a resurgent arrogance which finds fertile ground in the increasingly intergovernmental nature of European governance. Former Belgian finance minister and one time president of the European Investment Bank Philippe Maystadt is absolutely right when he opines that President Emmanuel Macron “has to realise that getting on well with the German chancellor will not be enough” and that, “if he wants to succeed, he will also have to show empathy for and solidarity with the other partners”. Believing that two countries might be a little more equal than the others will inevitably lead down a dead-end.
In truth, the French head of state would do well to remember this statement by Jean Monnet: “We are not forming coalitions of states, we are uniting men” – European citizens who will never accept that they are all anything less than equal!
Michel Theys