From one Presidency to another. Monday will be the last day of the Greek Presidency of the Council, and on Tuesday Italy will take over until the end of the year. The Greek Presidency confirmed the extent to which small countries can play a significant and positive role for Europe and are in a good position to act as mediators between the interests of the big countries when necessary (this is a subject to return to). The success of the negotiations over the Common Agricultural Policy rounded off the series of positive outcomes of the Greek Presidency, and I will be returning to this.
Today I would like to develop ideas about the Italian Presidency that is about to begin. Last year, various waverings in the attitude of Silvio Berlusconi's team (and the prime minister himself) and the demagogic and occasionally delirious anti-EU rant from Minister Umberto Bossi gave rouse to doubt about the permanence of Italy's customary support for the building of a united Europe. For a few months now, pro-European views and statements have been proliferating, along with the announcement of initiatives to relaunch the economy Europe-wise. But some areas need more clarification.
A "conflict of interests” that would be unthinkable in other Member States. The first area concerns Silvio Berlusconi's personal position. I get the impression that in Italy, the citizen in the street is not fully aware of the anomaly, as far as other Member States are concerned, of a prime minister who is a media mogul directly owning or generally controlling (through his institutional position) almost all TV channels. The “conflict of interest” between the two jobs is vigorously slammed by the domestic political opposition but most of public opinion does not see it as a radical obstacle (if they had, Berlusconi would not have won the elections without settling this issue). Other heads of government, asked about this anomaly, restrict themselves to saying it would not be possible in their country but it wouldn't stand in the way of good relations and cooperation with the Italian government. There are two sides to this - Italians have to understand that in the rest of Europe, the existence of this conflict of interests is embarrassing and would not be accepted. The citizens of other Member States have to realise that it is not seen as such a disaster by most of public opinion. Despite its disagreeable aspects, this situation should not prevent good levels of collaboration and a fruitful and positive six months from the EU angle. The President of the European Commission, Romano Prodi, has expressed desire to work “hand in hand” with the Italian Presidency, in the interests of Europe.
Pro-European feeling has not gone away. Second comment. I am convinced that the waverings in Italian officialdom with regard to the EU (which I mention above) have not weakened the European passion felt by most Italians. I have asked figures from other Member States about this and they all tell me that the basic views of the country have not changed in the slightest in their view. Pro-Europe forces continue to act, visibly or invisibly according to the circumstances but with unwavering conviction, whether groups active in the corridors of power (I have already mentioned the “Group of Ten” in this column, of two former European Commissioners, a former Permanent Representative to the EU and other top level figures, who regularly publish sensible ideas for Italy's political, economic and social milieus) or movements addressing public opinion directly. The permanent support of the Italian President, Carlo Azeglio Ciampi, for Italy's pro-EU views, along with his encouragement and warnings to the Italian government and parliament have been widely publicised. A few days ago, we announced the formation of a new political party by MEP Mario Segni, which has the EU as its priority and symbol (see page 5 of our 25 June bulletin). One of my correspondents in another Member State has told me that Italy is still making fundamental contributions to the idea of Europe.
A widespread "childhood disorder". I think the political class that has come to power since the last elections ahs suffered from a “childhood disorder” that we have already seen in other Member States in the past. People who are new to running a country sometimes know virtually nothing about the European Union, how it functions and how it was built, beyond a few slogans or articles in British newspapers (which are admirable from various points of view and have taught everyone freedom to use a register virtually unknown on the Convention, but which is difficult to see as an overall source of objective and reliable information about European affairs). The new political class has the false impression that in the past, national interests were not sufficiently defended in Brussels (or the EU didn't take enough account of them) and they say they'll be firmer and more determined. As they get to know what really happens in the EU, as they discover the way the specific aspects of each Member State are taken into consideration by EU institutions and can be expressed at the European Parliament, the ones who act in good faith rectify their views and have a better understanding of the reality and meaning of the European interest, a synthesis of national interests. I don't want to present a jaded artificial image of European reality, which is also formed from confrontation and crisis, but a long foothold in Brussels allows me to bear witness to the substantial validity of the Community Method and has taught me how apprenticeship can be long and difficult at times. I have recommended, to deal with this, a compulsory traineeship in the institutions (or a subscription to Agence Europe) not just for would-be officials but also for would-be Commissioners and a fortiori for Presidents of the European Council without any specific EU experience.
From apprenticeship to the programme. I return to the case of Italy. Various changes speak volumes, for example deputy prime minister Gianfranco Fini, who did his European apprenticeship in the best location possible, the European Convention. And very profitably, judging by the last moments of his time as Convention Member. I am assured that the same goes for the foreign minister, Franco Frattini. And the minister who will be chairing the ECOFIN Council, Giulio Tremonti, did not wait until he took up his new job before preparing and discussing his plans for relaunching investment in infrastructure both with some of his colleagues and with the relevant European Parliament committee.
The Italian Presidency's overall programme will be discussed with the Commission in the next few days, in Rome, once it has been presented to the European Parliament. So we will have time to discuss it in detail. A preliminary, informal presentation by the Permanent Representative, Umberto Vattani, set the tone (see page 6 of our bulletin on 26 June). Over and above the specific issues already publicised (launching and, where possible, concluding the Intergovernmental Conference on the Constitution for Europe in December; the above-mentioned Tremonti plan; relaunching Mediterranean policy; tighter security for citizens; etc.), Vattani presented a speech in favour of Europe, a call for cohesion, solidarity and defence of the European interest, alongside the clearly expressed desire to not allow the draft Constitution drawn up by the European Convention to be dismantled (Fini says Italy could accept it in its current form).
Nothing is certain yet, of course, and a Presidency is assessed on the basis of its act, not its announcements. Berlusconi himself will no doubt moderate his views by lining up with common positions; preposterous ideas like Russia joining the EU along with Israel might be expressed from a personal view, if he really holds these ideas, but the President of the Council speaks on behalf of everyone and should keep some of his thoughts and intuitions to himself.
The three tests Europe is waiting for. At the end of the day, the six months of the Italian Presidency will give Italy a unique opportunity to show what the whole of Europe is waiting for, namely: a) that Italy's commitment to the EU is permanent; b) a desire to prove this commitment in action rather than in words; and c) the ability of the political class (both the majority and the opposition) to move beyond divisions and quarrels not in a general manner (since they are the salt of freedom and democracy) but when it comes to consolidating Europe and moving it on.
In most EU countries, change of political power has never changed or even ruffled the general move in direction of building Europe, and this goes for big countries like Germany as much as small and medium-sized countries like Belgium. Italy now has to prove it is part of the same category.
(F.R.)