EU clarifies its ideas. The quarrel within the EU over the Euro-Mediterranean project has blown over. The European Council has included the Union for the Mediterranean in the updated Barcelona process and has instructed the European Commission to develop it. We then observed, however, that there was still a non-official tendency in France to ignore the summit's declarations and relaunch the former intergovernmental, rhetorical and inefficient project. The debates and the “Paris Forum declaration” (see this section in EUROPE 9637 and 9638) were, in effect, incompatible with the compromise that had allowed Germany's support for the initiative and the European Council to achieve unanimity.
“Official” France, nonetheless, has confirmed that its position is actually the one reached with the agreement-in-principle made at the spring summit. This was twice confirmed: through a speech by the secretary of state for European Affairs, Jean-Pierre Jouyet and through a speech made by the permanent representative to Brussels, Ambassador Pierre Sellal, to his colleagues. Of course, France's global ambitions and certain orientations persist (such as that for providing the Union for the Mediterranean with “joint governance” shared on an equal basis between the EU and Mediterranean third countries), as well as an indication that common projects should be regarded as priorities. This still needs thrashing out but the EU agrees and all member states will take part in the process, without any distinction being made between countries neighbouring the Mediterranean and the others. The institutions will also fully play a part and initiatives and decisions will be taken according to Community procedures and instruments. There are no other divergences in this regard.
The European Commission and most member states aim to relaunch the Barcelona process through another political boost and greater visibility. The contents in the initiative remain the same. Commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner pointed out that “everything is already there in the 1995 launched project - environment, energy, immigration, the fight against terrorism etc - but everything needs to be strengthened. The European Council decided that this will be done in the framework of the European institutions and on the basis of existing policies. The visibility of the summit that France is organising on 13 July will help give further impetus to the process”. Asked about there being a specific Union for the Mediterranean secretariat, taken as read in Paris, the commissioner for external relations would only comment that “it is too early to talk about it”. Some aspects therefore still need to be clarified.
The differences of approach, however, should not be blown out of proportion. They will be overcome. President Barroso will employ his diplomatic skill, and sensitivities will give way to policy.
Fundamental differences. The real divergences are those existing between Mediterranean third countries. This column has already pointed out that the idea of a Union, with all that this would entail in European terms, is a none-starter. It cannot exist at the moment (due to ongoing conflicts) and it cannot be envisaged for the future because the countries attending the 13 July ceremony have radically different goals. In Paris, the supporters of the Union for the Mediterranean obviously recognise the impossibility of taking political action as long as the Israel-Palestine conflict, the Lebanon tragedy and the Morocco-Algeria quarrel continue, and the focus will be on concrete areas of cooperation where the objectives are shared, beginning with the decontamination of the Mediterranean. Several Arab countries, however, with Egypt at the head of them, do not agree with political aspects being ignored and one Moroccan diplomat observed that if decontamination does not garner sufficient support, they ought to do something else.
There are too many Mediterranean third countries that do not see themselves as a group in a newly-created Union. I have to ask myself whether they would be capable of appointing a joint president if they wanted to, and who would guide this Union with the co-president appointed by the EU. Their goals are radically different: Croatia and Turkey are negotiating accession and others are aiming at this goal; Morocco is aiming at an advanced status, as already announced by the European Commission; Israel has its special status; Algeria wants an energy partnership; and the Arab League and several of its members are only concentrating on the political aspects.
Nothing doing then? Absolutely not. There are several examples that prove that there are lots of practical things to accomplish and important projects are advancing in addition to the big ceremonials and rhetoric.
(F.R.)