Over and above the general considerations on Germany's European policy developed on the previous page, some press reactions to the "Schroeder Declaration" on the institutional structure of the future of Europe deserve being underpinned. The main political reactions were summarized in our bulletin of yesterday, p.5. One will have noted that the French Minister for European Affairs, Pierre Moscovici, observed that "States cannot simply become the second chamber of the European Parliament", and that no politician has stressed the disappearance of the European Council in the German Chancellor's institutional scheme of things, as known for now.

Jean-Louis Bourlanges confirms and strengthens his reservations. My hope that Germany's pro-European attitude (and not only the Chancellor's party, as the CDU globally welcomed the "Schroeder Document") should eliminate or reduce certain reservations regarding the Treaty of Nice is still dashed. That's the least one can say, reading the reaction of the Euro-MP Jean-Louis Bourlanges, who had already taken a stance against the ratification of the Treaty. Mr. Bourlanges declared to the "Tribune" of 2 May: "With the introduction of a demographic net for qualified majority voting in the Council that breaks the equality between the large States, with the new seats that Germany MEPs will benefit from in the European Parliament and with the reform of the Commission that will enable all States, whatever their size, to benefit from a representation, Germany wins in reinforcing institutions that it now dominates. Under these conditions, Italy, Spain, the United Kingdom and France have effectively and unfortunately interest in developing an intergovernmental Europe. A great blow to the European Community ideal which, decidedly, has lately suffered somewhat".

Let's take note. Need I add that, personally, I share neither the opinion that, with the reforms of Nice, European institutions, will be "dominated" by Germany, nor that the intergovernmental system is becoming the last resort for the "large countries" to counter German hegemony? I continue to believe that it is in an intergovernmental system that the relative weight of each country weighs brutally, in the absence of the correction of the "common interest" assured by the "Community method". Even after the reforms of Nice (which cannot in any case be regarded as definitive as they have not settled the question of the Commission or that of the method of voting within the Council), Germany will not dominate Community institutions. The German authorities are doing their best to have people understand that they are not pursuing any hegemonic project. It is obvious that, in Bourlanges, they have not succeeded.

The German model and the European super-State. Does the Schroeder Document run along the lines of a European super-State, or on the contrary, reject it?. On that point opinions vary but one point is clear: the rejection of a super-State (which, moreover is not present in any plan, the general tendency being, we know, in favour of a federation of nation-States) is rejected by all commentators, both those who believe that the German document represents a step in that direction and those who dispute that interpretation. Several commentators blame the Chancellor rather of having drawn an institutional model too closely inspired on the German model (see, for example, La Repubblica).

There is, however, a "positive" unanimity on another aspect: the effort of, at least in part, meeting the "democratic deficit" of the Union, effort that is even recognised by those who do not at all share the solution chosen by Berlin for strengthening European democratic legitimacy.

One element of concern strangely ignored. No commentators I've had the opportunity to consult highlight an essential aspect of the "Schroeder Document": the plan to hand back to States (or regions) some powers in the field of agriculture and structural policy. The summary in the Spiegel only mentions the structural field, but the text as such also explicitly mentions agricultural policy. This demand had already been explicitly expressed by the President of the Land of Bavaria. Must we now understand that, according to the Chancellor, two essential chapters of Community activity must disappear as Community policies? In that case one could expect particularly strong reactions from both France (for the CAP) and Spain (for regional policy), and the European Commission would also doubtless have something to say. But at the same time it is understandable that the authorities should avoid taking an official stand on a text that is but a sketch. I can thus only repeat what has been said on the previous page: no detailed or final assessment is possible at the current stage. Let's wait for Germany to have better defined its ideas and for now welcome the presence of the highest authorities in the broad debate.

(F.R.)