Strasbourg, 12/12/2007 (Agence Europe) - The preparation of the European Council reflected the very hard work over the last six months and confirmed that the Portuguese presidency's objectives had been largely met. It was with those positive words that Council President Manuel Lobo Antunes, addressing the European Parliament for the last time, began the debate on the European Council which is expected to make decision on the political challenges confronting the EU, first and foremost, globalisation, which requires the EU to act. Lobo Antunes reviewed the issues to be debated in: - freedom security and justice, with the abolition of border controls for the new member states - a measure which directly affects citizens - and the implementation of migration and anti-terrorism policies; - the economic sector, with consideration of the next cycle of the revised Lisbon Strategy and its enhanced external dimension. As part of the review of the sustainable development strategy, the European Commission will also present a plan for an integrated maritime policy; - the external chapter; - the European Council will also discuss, among other things, the future status of Kosovo, and the possible EU role in this process.
The signing of the Lisbon Treaty, was not, said European Commission President José Manuel Barroso, a simple formality, but confirmation that the EU was able to resolve its institutional problems and respond to its citizens' concerns. Consolidation of the external dimension of the Lisbon strategy and recent economic developments, with an improvement in employment figures, were also encouraging, but Barroso said there should be no self-satisfaction, because progress had not been the same across all regions and sectors. That said, the EU was well placed to continue domestic reform and defend its interests in its relations with the rest of the world, he noted. The world, he went on, was constantly changing, and it was fascinating to see the speed at which China, India and Brazil, in particular, were developing and the challenges and opportunities for Europe that were resulting from it. The challenges required an integrated response, taking account of the needs of citizens and respecting European values.
The signing of the Lisbon Treaty was welcomed as a great event by a large majority of MEPs, apart from a handful of sovereigntists. Speaking on behalf of the EPP-ED, French MEP Joseph Daul said that this signing “sounds the return of Europe of results”, a Europe within which the European Parliament would have greater rights and responsibilities towards citizens, and this would demand that it demonstrate greater rigour and visibility. Speaking of the extension of the Schengen area to include the new member states, Daul said that equality of treatment implied equality before the law. Those who had wanted to destroy the constitution had been given a lesson, said German MEP Martin Schulz for the Socialist group, and he hoped that the celebration of the signing (which he compared to a wedding) would not be followed by disappointment when it came to ratification (if there was no ratification, it would be like a divorce). British MEP Andrew Duff, for the ALDE group, was the first to raise an issue that has preoccupied Parliament: the future of Kosovo. The European Council, Duff said, must take a firm stance on the size of the ESDP mission to Kosovo, and refuse to sign an agreement with Serbia until such time as it has delivered those suspected of war crimes to the International Criminal Tribunal. Duff felt that the search for a solution to the future of the Balkans could be a task that could usefully be taken on by the Group of the Wise, the setting up of which he welcomed. Brian Crowley (UEN, Ireland, expressed the hope that the referendum in his country would say yes to the Treaty, but asked the EU to make more of an effort to understand the real wishes of citizens. Kosovo was also a major concern of German MEP Daniel Cohn-Bendit (Greens/EFA) who told a Jewish story: “If you have two possibilities, choose the third one”. For Kosovo, the third possibility would be an agenda involving Kosovo, Serbia and Bosnia-Herzegovina giving each simultaneous prospects of closer links with the EU. Cohn-Bendit was the only one to speak about Iran, opining that Europe had a role to play in opposing the oppression of Iranian citizens who wanted greater freedom. On a possible nuclear threat from a third country, he said it was impossible to sell nuclear power stations to countries governed by dictators hoping they would never be used for military purposes, because, one day, they would be. The signing of the treaty, a good thing in itself, would not end the crisis of confidence among citizens, said French MEP Francis Wurtz, for the GUE/NGL group. He also called on Europe to finally end paternalism towards African states, and expressed his surprise that the Middle East was not on the European Council agenda. He said it was important that the EU did not feel locked out of the peace process after the Annapolis Conference. Consensus on the signing of the treaty was shattered by Danish MEP Jens-Peter Bonde, for the Independence and Democracy group: he said that the signing of the text should quite simply be stopped until it was understood by citizens.
The chairman of the foreign affairs committee, Polish MEP Jacek Saryusz-Wolski said that the treaty reinforced the coherence of EU actions and that the creation of a legal basis for new instruments linked to the CFSP was a great step forward. There still were some gaps, however, notably the extent of Parliament's involvement in some basic CFSP decisions. German Liberal Alexander Lambsdorff agreed with the positive aspects of the treaty, but was more sceptical over individual states' political will, and was frankly critical on bringing citizens and the EU closer together. This “magnificent success”, said Alain Lamassoure (EPP-ED) in the same spirit, must not be “tarnished by what follows”. He called on states that might change their minds about holding a referendum to inform their partners of this before, and not after, the signing: it was, he said a “basic duty of fairness”. Several MEPs expressed their satisfaction at having a binding Charter adopted, even though it was not, as Spanish Socialist Enrique Baron regretted, “firmly anchored” in the treaty. Polish Socialist Genowefa Grabowska said she could not understand the attitude of states (her own and the United Kingdom) which “deprive” their citizens of the benefits of the charter. Luxemburg Socialist Robert Goebbels regretted how slight the EU action in social affairs was. The Lisbon strategy was bearing fruit, but Goebbels denounced the drift of the “delicate flower of international finance”, which, by its irresponsible behaviour, showed that “greed was stronger than intelligence”. Spanish Green MEP Mikel Irujo Amezaga expressed regret that the indicators used in the Lisbon strategy related too often to GDP, without taking account of environmental indicators. Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL, Portugal) was unhappy that so much store was put on flexicurity, which, she felt, brought job insecurity. Kosovo, said Austrian Socialist Johannes Swoboda, would be a real test of the EU's will to lead a genuine CFSP. Swoboda favoured limited independence, carefully monitored, in the first instance, and said that a unilateral declaration of independence by Kosovo was “unthinkable”.
A number of MEPs said they were against the new treaty: it was not necessary, according to British Conservative Giles Chichester; it created a “super-state”, lamented James Allister (non-attached, UK). Paul-Marie Couteaux (Ind-Dem, France) went further. He said it was simply a return to the treaty which the French had rejected, an “illegal” act which had to be disobeyed.
Manuel Lobo Antunes: Kosovo is above all a European problem
The Council president responded on the status of Kosovo, pointing to the attempts of the EU, US and Russia troika, attempts which had not been successful but were not a total failure. Several parts of the document drawn up by Martti Ahtisaari had been built on and the commitment not to resort to violence, if it is respected, represented real progress. The United Nations Security Council is to hold a debate on Kosovo; if no solution is found, the EU will have to take a stance, maintaining a united front at all costs. “Kosovo is, above all a European problem,” he said. With regard to the Balkans, the EU offered them European prospects which were “solid and unequivocal … these countries know that Europe is for them a natural vocation”.
Commission Vice-President Margot Wallström took stock of a number of issues raised in the debate: - ratifications: it was important to respond to citizens' demands for information according to their specific needs; - reflection group: this group had to concentrate on the necessary political changes and not on institutional issues; - migration: an integrated approach, with a mix of EU and national policies, was needed; - the Lisbon strategy: it delivers, but agreement was needed on sustainable development as part of this strategy. (L.G.)