Brussels, 14/09/2005 (Agence Europe) - In an interview with Monday's Frankfurter Allgemeine, the Latvian President Vaira Vike-Freiberga, in answer to a question on the consequences of the French and Dutch noes to the European Constitution, said (our translation throughout): "France and the Netherlands sent us a certain message (...), but these two countries should now explain to us what it means. What does France want to do? What do the Netherlands want to do? What does this mean for the countries which said yes?". When asked whether the solution could be a few small changes to the treaty, which could then be voted on in a joint referendum on all the Member States, Ms Vike-Viberga replied: "This would be breaking the deadlock. But this would make no sense without a significant contribution on the part of those countries with serious misgivings or whose populations said no. This means that we must go backwards, all the way to where we started off. And if we have a few noes again, then- and this is my Plan C - we should divide the whole thing up into its component parts and vote on each individual part". Should there be a referendum each time? "It may become apparent that it is not at all necessary to vote on various issues", said Ms Vike-Viberga, who added: "the constitutional treaty was in any case too long and too heavy. It was quite simply indigestible. We should set priorities, and one priority should be to ensure the capacity of the EU to make decisions, by dint of new rules on decision-making".
How far would you be prepared to go even integration, as far as a "European government", for example? The Latvian President answered this question by saying that "we should be open to this kind of idea. When Garibaldi and Bismarck appeared in Italy and Germany, many people thought that they were dreamers. A common economic policy would be a first step. This is where it hurts the most. When we have done it, we will see that differences on other policies- such as the foreign policy- will be much easier to overcome". On the possibility of a group of countries going ahead faster than others, as a "driving force" of integration, the president asked: "what could this driving force do, and what should it do, what should France and Germany do, apart from what they do anyway, and they have not been able to agree on it".