A presidential programme. Why write about the plan for Europe unveiled by French presidential front-runner Nicolas Sarkozy (the French presidential elections will be held in the spring of next year)? Because I cannot remember any candidate for president of any EU country in the past announcing that he would be putting Europan issues at the heart of his programme and also setting out his views in advance so unequivocally and in such detail, in order to enable citizens to be able to vote not only on domestic politics but also choose among options for Europe. Sarkozy's speech last Friday was a far cry from the simple expounding of a politician's views - it is a presidential programme (if the French decide to elect him). He decided to actually make the speech in Brussels, addressing Etienne Davignon's 'Friends of Europe' association in collaboration with the Robert Schuman Foundation.
Nicolas Sarkozy did not try to hide his vision of Europe behind purple prose or use newspeak to try to appeal to everyone - he deliberately made his views clear, even on thorny and controversial issues. He said that in his opinion, the current draft Constitution will never come into force and Turkey cannot aspire to becoming a full member of the EU. He made no bones about his not seeing eye to eye with various Member States. On illegal immigration, for example, while making a strong argument in favour of EU solidarity with the most exposed countries, he said that if any government made a 'mass regularisation' of illegals without even consulting other countries, it could not turn round later and complain about the impact of its decisions and their 'reverberations'. Solidarity presupposes consultation. This comment led on to some caustic ironic remarks about how the Council of the EU operates (Sarkozy is part of it in his current position of Fren ch interior minister) - how can it reach decisions after genuine debate and listening to others when 25 ministers all take it in turns to speak and each each is given two minutes? It's hardly surprising in these circumstances that not much is achieved. Sarkozy says that in fact, he's surprised they actually manage to achieve as much as they do and can even agree on anything, including what's on the agenda.
Mature reflection. It soon became clear that Nicolas Sarkozy's vision of Europe was no flash-in-the-pan, but has been long thought out, with detailed examination of the issues and consideration of the EU's political, psychological and institutional backdrop. Some time back, his first ideas about various EU issues were more superficial and seemed more couched in the truisms and common ideas of the man in the street. But what a change! One example is that what seemed in the past to be ideas moving in the direction of a ruling 'directoire' of big countries, has turned into 'the utility of several Member States informally preparing for the big European summits' (see point 3 below), and this is now a group of all categories of states without distinction, without any privileges for the big fish. He gave the example of Mediterranean countries (including Malta) preparing for EU cooperation concering illegal immigration. He could also have mention ed Poland's place among Member States involved in EU diplomatic efforts with regard to the Ukraine, or how the gradual unfurling of EU defence policy came about.
Nicolas Sarkozy has drawn around himself a group of figureheads who know the EU from the inside and have long been champions of Europe, to help him formulate his ideas,like Michel Barnier, former European Commissioner (who has just announced that he will not be standing in the next French elections but rather for the 2009 European elections with the aim of becoming an MEP), and Alain Lamassoure, an MEP with long experience.
Vital choices. I will not attempt to sum up Friday's speech because our Editor-in-Chief has already made a good job of that in the last bulletin), but will simply sketch out what seem to me to be the five main novelties of this 'new French vision for tomorrow's Europe' as Nicolas Sarkozy himself entitled his speech.
1. Constitutional text and mini-institutional treaty. The current version of the constitutional treaty will never come into force. It's cruel and unfair but it's a fact, he says. Europe does, however, need a reference text, a fundamental text, whatever name it is given in the end, but will need time to decide on one. In order to draw it up, a new Convention should be appointed after the next European elections in 2009.
But Europe has work do to in the meantime because two years of deadlock is enough. While awaiting the new fundamental text, Sarkozy suggests the rapid conclusion of a mini-treaty with the changes and innovations to the institutions from the current draft constitution where there is overall consensus - a 'double' majority (of states and populations) for voting on the Council, the creation of an EU Foreign Minister, the European Parliament voting in the President of the European Commission, monitoring of and respect for subsidiarity, citizens' right of initiative and simplifying 'strengthened cooperation' to make it operational. Negotiations over the mini-treaty could be launched at the beginning of next year under the German Presidency, and the ratification process could be concluded in the second half of 2008 under the French Presidency.
2. Reforming the European Commission. The wording selected for the draft constitutional treaty is unsatisfactory because it guarantees neither the Commission's efficiency of action nor its legitimacy. The idea of one Commissioner per country should therefore be kept for when Romania and Bulgaria join (under the Nice Treaty there would be an immediate reduction in the number of Commissioners), with serious reflection then beginning on how to change the overall system. Sarkozy personally favours the idea of making the President of the Commission responsible for deciding on how the Commission is composed, as long as the European Parliament and Council approve, meaning that the Commission would not be a rigid body but could be adapted to correspond to the political power ratio.
3. Decision-making. The 'bolt' of unanimous voting has to go. Sarkozy favours the idea of no Member State being obliged to accept any plan it disapproves of, but of not being able to prevent the others from going ahead (he gave the example of a potential mechanism banning tax competition). In terms of rules to put this in practice, he mentioned 'variable geometry' groups based on the model of the Euro Group and the Group of Five that has already been extended to include Poland on police cooperation matters, and 'preparatory groups' for draft decisions to be submitted to the official institutions. He stressed the utility of several countries informally preparing for the big EU summits but made no mention of what role the Commissoin might play in all this.
4. Funding the EU. The current system is 'illogical, unfair, unaffordable for net contributors and incomprehensible for citizens'. The 2008-2009 budget review clause has to be used to think up a radically different system based on the EU's own resources without making the overall fiscal burden any heavier, introducing transparency in national expenditure incurred to implement EU decisions.
5. The EU's final frontiers. Nicolas Sarkozy says the EU's final frontiers have to be set. It is well-known that this idea is fiercely challenged by various institutions and political forces but Sarkozy says one should have the courage to say which countries are European and which are not. Countries which are 'clearly' part of Europe would be able to consider joining but for non-European partners in the Mediterranean or Asia, privileged partnerships would have to be considered that could include being part of the common market (a long as the partner countries applied and respected all EU rules for the common market) and even being part of various common policies. The EU's absorption capacity needs to be clarified and made workable - the EU should decide on future accession firstly from its own point of view, making sure any new countries joining the EU would allow the European zone of stability and solidarity to be pre served and consolidated.
6. Turkey. In the context of the EU's final frontiers, Nicolas Sarkozy was categorical. Turkey is a neighbouring country and a friend clearly sharing several EU values and with which the EU shares common security interests, but current relations with Turkey have to be built upon without planning on its full and complete membership of the European Union.
Between General De Gaulle and Jacques Delors. After his speech, Sarkozy was asked whether his vision of Europe was closer to General De Gaulle's or Jacques Delors'. A trap question if ever there was one for anyone wanting to remain loyal to French traditions while at the same time remaining open to a 'political Europe, Europe as a power and an integrated Europe because integration is a precondition for power'. He answered that Europe has to be a synthesis of De Gaulle's ambition and Delors' ability to compromise. This is an acceptable answer on one condition - as long as Nicolas Sarkozy was referring to De Gaulle in his later years, when he was firmly convinced that France's future in the long-term lay within a united Europe, and as long as he understands Jacques Delors' attitude not as willingness to give way on matters of principle but rather the ability to listen with the desire of taking account of the opinions of all Member States, resp ecting the history, traditions and mentality of each and every one of them. (F.R.)