Brussels, 22/01/2001 (Agence Europe) - The first policy debate by the General Affairs Council on the coherence of the European Union's external action, Monday in Brussels, concentrated on a highly criticised document by Javier Solana on the main failings of "common strategies". The priorities of the external actions and the budgetary choices that must correspond to them are also broached, with a global agreement and some divergences, but will only be the object of "Presidency conclusions".
The EU High Representative for CFSP, Javier Solana, presented to the EU 15 a highly criticised confidential document on the common strategies. Foreseen by the Amsterdam Treaty to define a common vision on certain policies, but also to prepare the decisions to be adopt by qualified majority, the common strategies stem from the European Council. To believe the document presented by Mr Solana, these strategies have for the moment served for nothing, because the are too vague and attach themselves to already existing policies without bringing added value. The common strategies, one can read in this document, "have until now not contributed to a stronger and more effective EU in international affairs".
These strategies are a sort of "Christmas tree" because of the demands of the Commission and Member States that want them "to cover the most aspects possible - which makes it very difficult to distinguish priorities from secondary issues". The strategies are published and are therefore "diplomatic" positions but they are not useful as "internal working documents that set out the pros and cons, reconciling the different aims and defining priorities". The working programmes on the common strategies foreseen by each Presidency to ensure an approach whereby these strategies are followed through and coherent are "routine exercises to which little attention is paid".
The four common strategies already adopted (Russia, Ukraine, Balkans, Mediterranean) concern countries for which "cooperation mechanisms and policies already existed or were being developed (…) which poses the question of their added value". Commenting on the common strategies for Russia and Ukraine, the High Representative considers, in this paper, that the adoption of such strategies "was appreciated" by all countries concerned because it shows that the EU attaches importance to its relations with them. However, as far as "substance" is concerned, this is only an "inventory of existing policies", creating "uncertainty" about relations with the partnership and cooperation agreements (PCAs) which are instruments defining at a contractual level and the relations between the EU and these countries. Russia, specifies the High Representative, wanted to enter true negotiations between the EU strategy towards it and its own strategy for its relations with the EU, although this is not the aim of a common strategy. Furthermore, the strategy for Russia "has not even been useful for the EU for tackling the specific issue of Chechnya".
In his report Javier Solana therefore calls for strategies to be targeted (rather than covering a whole country or region), that they give real added value and truly coordinate all the EU and Member States instruments and policies. He also considers that the strategies should be internal documents that cannot be negotiated, and calls for a clear distinction to be established between the proposals of common strategy intended to allow external policy decisions to be taken by qualified majority and more general proposals. During the press conference after the Council, Javier Solana felt it was important for common strategies to be used in the right direction, that they be focused and significant from the point of view of qualified majority vote.
The reaction of the Fifteen to this text was on the whole positive, but the response will be given at the General Affairs Council next month at the earliest. Council President Anna Lindh noted that, in general, the Member States support Mr Solana's document, and announced that the Committee of Permanent Representatives will prepare a response for February or March. On the question of the publication, or otherwise, of the common strategies, she said that "we shall also wait and see".
Budgetary choice of coherent foreign policy: enlargement, neighbouring regions,
reduction of poverty, conflict prevention
The "Presidency conclusions" were awaited during the evening on the priorities for EU external action. The debate on these priorities, meant to "help the Commission to develop its budgetary proposals for 2002, made it possible to define overall priorities, even though all Member States did not have the same notion of "neighbouring countries", and some insisted that certain regions should be helped in particular, explained Council sources. The budgetary choices of an external policy that is "coherent and successful" should, according to the Council, include the following priorities: "enlargement, neighbouring regions, reduction of poverty, conflict prevention, crisis management, and cooperation with the other actors of the international community", said Council President Anna Lindh.
The Commission also presented a document on the situation regarding reform of management of EU external aid programmes. The Council, stressed Anna Lindh, gave "considerable support to the reform process underway and all agree that attention should be paid over coming months to continuation of the process.