The uncertainties concerning the attitudes of some Member States at the Convention don't just involve the United Kingdom (see this section yesterday) but to a certain extent Italy and some eastern and central European countries as well. I'm not talking about the details of these uncertainties or such and such an aspect of an institutional reform, which are normal in the current phase but of those that refer to: a) the EU's ambitions, notably in the areas of CFSP and ESDP; b) the degree of transferring sovereignty from countries to the Union by the setting up of common and significant competencies.
Prevarication and clumsiness…A number of commentators and observers have expressed their regret at the absence of clear positions (that go beyond vague declarations in favour of European integration) and initiatives from Italy. The Italian authorities sometime associate themselves with one or another institutional initiative (especially Spain and the United Kingdom), without clearly defined guidelines. Their support for what became known as the "ABC Initiative" (Aznar/Blair/Chirac) for strengthening the role of Government Heads appeared obvious but France then outlined a number of less significant common positions with Germany as soon as the ABC group evaporated. At the same time, sources from Rome said that it was certain that Italy would unconditionally support the positions in favour of safeguarding the "Community method", particularly the role of the Commission. There was an impression that the Italian authorities were "playing it by ear". Ministers' declarations were sometimes contradictory; Mr Buttiglione certainly wasn't singing from the same hymn sheet as Mr Bossi. But in my opinion, the roars of Mr Bossi shouldn't be taken seriously, especially when he accuses the EU of harbouring Soviet-style inclinations or when he announces that he will defend the workers of northern Italy against the European judicial system. Personally, I consider that the coherent and convincing opposition to European integration comes from the Defence Minister Antonio Martino, who was previously Foreign Affairs Minister and fought against the idea of Italy entering the single currency (and who also declared that the Euro would certainly be a failure).
Too many changes of direction. Despite these differences and uncertainties, I don't think that there is an "Italian problem" that is the same as the "British problem". The Prime Minister has never allied himself with anti-Community positions (except the sad "Ruggiero episode") and the pro-European front has remained firm. If the government sometimes appeared hesitant, other forces remained committed. "The Group of Ten" uniting two former European Commissioners, the former Secretary General of the European Parliament, a former Permanent Representative to Brussels and the "Europe" Director General for Foreign Affairs (see yesterday's bulletin p 17) is an example of this. But even official Italy is moving or appears to have the intention of doing so. Vice President of the Convention, Giuliano Amato has launched the idea of Italy becoming the promoter of a common initiative of the six founding EEC countries inside the Convention which favours the maintenance and re-launch of the ambitions and objectives of the founding fathers, an idea which has interested Vice Prime Minister Gianfranco Fini (who's also at the Convention) and the Minister of Foreign Affairs Franco Frattini. They've talked about it with Dominique de Villepin and Joschka Fischer. Contacts have indicated that for the time, a common approach of the "Six" would only have a very general character given that on the content of institutional reform, the Benelux countries do not agree with all the aspects of the Chirac/Schröder plan. The "Six" initiative could also antagonise other countries. It is therefore likely that there will not be any follow-up, at least in the immediate term but I'm looking at the project as a symptom of the Italian desire to "get back in the game". Personally, I consider that the prevarication and clumsiness of official Italy is more the result of a certain lack of knowledge about European construction, about how the system and its checks and balances work rather than a deliberate distancing itself form the traditional positions of the country (also backed up by guarantees of the President of the Republic).
Cautiousness in the East. The institutional debates at the Convention appeared to have created a certain distrust in east and central European countries towards their government representatives and national parliamentarians with regard to transferring powers to Brussels, as well as a firm attachment to the six-month rotating presidencies. I don't see any fundamental reticence in this case either but rather, a particular sensitiveness to the problem of sovereignty by countries that were subject for many years to the control of a foreign power and which have only very recently rediscovered their autonomy. Their cautiousness is therefore understandable. They are becoming a problem where some people are becoming more distrustful than cautious and this is likely to seriously influence the accession referendums. This fear, however, should not lead the EU to water down its ambitions.
Plenary session of the European Parliament