One year ago …To grasp the full significance of this Thursday and Friday's European Council, one has to compare the today's situation with what it was like a year ago. The situation was simple: the Lisbon Strategy was deadlocked because of a lack of binding instruments and Community procedures; a European energy policy was thought to be illusory, a dream, since each member state was acting on its own behalf. Today, a) the benefits of the Lisbon Strategy (revised wisely, without promising too much or setting unrealistic deadlines) have become clear, and even spectacular in some member states, with positive repercussions for the whole EU; b) a partial basis for a European energy policy is about to be approved at the highest level.
Energy and the half full - or half empty - glass. It would be idle to expect some sort of turn around in public opinion, suddenly becoming aware of the advantages and benefits of the European project. This has too often been decried (and still is in some member states) for its merits to be generally recognised. The reality is encouraging, however. Even the institutional dynamic would seem to have picked up a little impetus: in particular, what heads of state and government will approve in the area of energy is based on proposals from the European Commission. Commission President José Manuel Barroso was quick, in his press conference on Tuesday, to back even those parts which he knew, because they would not receive unanimous support, would not be taken up by the summit. Speaking to journalists, he used the common image of the half full/half empty glass. He took an empty glass, and held it up saying, This was the situation a year ago. He half filled it, and said: This will be the situation after the summit. And thus, he demonstrated his hopes and their limits.
Mr Barroso believes that the renewable energy targets should be binding and not indicative (even business is calling for this, to be able to plan their investment), but is not certain to get this. He believes unbundling of oil and gas production and distribution is necessary, but he knows that the summit will compromise. He believes a single energy market for the EU as a whole is needed, but he accepts that the creation of a number of regional markets would be progress on the current situation with its national markets (while restating that the goal remains a large single market). He confirmed that trying to find a “European” stance on nuclear power would be the best way to make no progress at all. Decisions on this issue will remain national, but the Commission will exercise its responsibilities on security, research, etc, with regard to who takes up the nuclear option. Mr Barroso also confirmed that member states will be able to use part of the funding from the Structural Funds to finance some aspects of the energy policy (in particular research).
Conclusion: it will take a few years for the glass to be full, the main thing is to make progress and to maintain the level of ambition.
Important for the world. The Commission president also stressed how keenly Europe's decisions are awaited by third countries: “The eyes of Washington, Moscow and Beijing are on us”. The outcome of the G8 talks in June will, in large part, be determined by what Europe decides or proposes on energy, combating climate change, and sustainable and eco-friendly development.
The Declaration will be political. The Berlin Declaration marking the 50th anniversary of the Treaty of Rome will be discussed at the summit, and two pieces of information seem to me to be significant: a) the German presidency is keeping responsibility for drafting the text, which will not be written by officials; b) Mr Barroso has said that all the heads of government that he had met agreed that the euro be included among Europe's success stories, and the possibility of further accessions to the EU will be mentioned.
This is a significant double response to the difficulties and dissensions among governmental representatives (see this column in EUROPE 9379). On the level of the “sherpas”, mentioning the single currency may seem inappropriate to a member state which has not joined the euro; but no head of government will challenge its inclusion as a great success of European integration. This is reassuring for the scope and significance of the Berlin Declaration, but takes nothing away from the impression that member states differ radically in their views on how Europe should develop in the future and what it should be aiming for.
(F.R.)