Balkan accessions: the priority condition? The European Commission demands that the opening of talks (for membership or for association agreements) with Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina and later Serbia should be preceded by these countries' full cooperation with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY). This is understandable. But I cannot hide the fact that I feel somewhat put out by the almost obsessive insistence on this condition and by the requirement that a number of well-known, explicitly named figures should first of all be handed over to the ICTY before any negotiations can begin. Inadmissible crimes have indeed been committed. But should the prior arrest of a pair of generals really be the absolute precondition, if you were to ask what people think both locally and internationally? In a sad period of ethnic cleansing, there were crimes on all sides - and there are still some outbreaks of brutality, the latest in Kosovo. Is it not a little excessive to make the opening of talks subject to “positive evaluation” of the situation by the ICTY (see declarations by Commissioner Olli Rehn in our bulletin of 20 January, p.4). Should not emphasis be placed more on reconciliation, a return to freedom, and the acceptance of the Copenhagen criteria? The perpetrators of some crimes must of course be prosecuted and punished but this must be just one element among others. Insisting above all, and sometimes solely, on this risk aspect is, I believe, tantamount to not giving the public a sufficiently overall and objective view of the reasons for which some countries become gradually more mature to be able to join the European Union and for the latter to be able to open its doors to them.
Encouraging situation for European agriculture. Looking at the speech made on Wednesday by the new president of the Agriculture Council addressing the European Parliament committee on this sector (see yesterday's bulletin, p.5), I immediately had the impression it sounded familiar. But of course, Fernand Boden! The minister who had chaired the same Council in 1997 and who had pushed through the definition of principles and aims for the renewed Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), in which agriculture's multifunctional nature was mentioned for the very first time in an official Council document. Mr Boden is the link between these two presidencies, saying his fundamental aim will be to continue to work towards the consolidation and defence of the European model of agriculture defined in 1997, based on a competitive, sustainable, multifunctional agriculture spread out over the whole Union territory, including the less advantaged regions. The Foreign Affairs Council had (probably without reading it) included this text in those forwarded to the Summit. It was a major stage in the long battle in favour of European agriculture, in that it was being taken into account as an essential element in our civilisation, our landscapes, our traditions and also our political and economic autonomy (which cannot exist without a certain degree of food autonomy). At the time, the result had been moderated: the other Council formations had not sufficiently taken into account the forceful ideas set out in the Boden document - but since then these ideas have been gaining ground.
It is a good thing that Boden is there again to restate these ideas, as the battle for European agriculture is never won and should be continued relentlessly. Mr Boden presented some interesting ideas to MEPs. For example, that of not linking projects for the development of rural areas (which essentially consist in EU territory and must not necessary focus their efforts on farm production, far from it) to overall financial perspectives for 2007-2013. Effective regulation is a matter of urgency and must be established whatever the financial allocation is at the end of the day. Mr Boden also insisted on the quality of life, the safeguarding of forests, and economic diversification in rural areas. Several of the dossiers taken up by him are linked to EU relations with third countries (sugar, banana import regime, wood, etc.). Coordination between those responsible for agriculture and those responsible for external relations should be ensured. Mr Boden also spoke of growing public interest in food safety, health, animal welfare, and the protection of plants. It is not enough to have good regulations; one must also avoid the necessarily severe provisions that we adopt from being badly implemented. Mr Boden alluded on several occasions to the large number of projects already presented by the Commission under Mr Fischler's responsibility and to those it has still to present, under the responsibility of Ms Fischer Boel. The latter's role will be crucial - common guidelines and bonne entente between the Commissioner and the Council president are essential. (F.R.)