Fashion for negative assessments. Sometimes, I feel quite isolated. A positive opinion of European construction, its effects and results, is not unreasonable. To shed light on not just the difficulties and failures, but also the advantages, means being on the receiving end of all the criticism. Pointing out that a financial crisis also includes a positive factor, that of eradicating a large, unjust, and abusive side of the system, does not correspond to the habits of the majority of the media, which prefers catastrophic announcements and the calculation of the number of billions of euro allegedly vanishing into thin air in a bad run at the stock exchange. The same rule applies to the “news in brief”: catastrophic headlines sell newspapers and increase radio and television audiences.
A case in point? When a European commissioner leaves work to return to national political life, his decision is systematically presented as off-message: it means leaving Brussels and prioritising the national profile over the more bureaucratic and obscure machinations of Europe, abandoning ship when the sea starts to get rough. If we now added the intention to prepare a national political future in the perspective of the Commission's mandate coming to an end, we cannot know (while awaiting the outcome of the Lisbon Treaty) what the future will be.
Let's not forget what we've learned. It is true that there have been three cases over the several months - Peter Mandelson after Franco Frattini and Marcos Kyprianou - this gives us food for thought. I do not, however, see the departure of a commissioner who still has his mandate, as entirely negative. The three cases in point left the comforts of Brussels to take on front line positions in their national governments. It is therefore not true or, rather, it is no longer the case, that a European commissioner is a nobody in his country of origin, exiled to Brussels with the goal of making a place available at a national level or that the post is given as a “consolation prize” to someone who no longer has a future in national politics and is being removed. It was perhaps true many years ago in some member states. But everything changed with Jacques Delors. When he was appointed to Brussels, he was not exactly popular in his country; it was through his presidency of the European Commission that he became famous in Europe and beyond and he could have gone back to Paris to be elected president of the Republic if had really wanted.
The most important aspect, however, is otherwise: the Brussels experience leaves its mark! A former commissioner brings his country of origin, experience and understanding of Europe that is extremely precious. The opposite certainly exists too. There is a case of a former commissioner who, after his departure, adopted an active and obtuse anti-European position. Ralf Dahrendorf did nothing but fight against European construction in an entirely prejudiced and arrogant way. But how many examples go the other way? A new commissioner sometimes arrives in Brussels with preconceived ideas: distrust of the European bureaucracy, a conviction that European construction is a purely economic enterprise dominated by lobbies, but he discovers a significantly different world. He begins to get to know and appreciate other member states, forgetting the prejudices and conflicts of the past. He becomes aware of European objectives and acquires a sense of solidarity. Horizons become larger. Cultural, historic, political and economic prejudices falter and this experience stays with him.
A former commissioner or figure that has been in a position of senior responsibility in Brussels, whose experience of the trials of the European agenda then provides an opportunity to preside over the Council of Europe, often has a view that is more extensive and objective than his role. The current president of the Agriculture Council, Michel Barnier, has been a European commissioner, and the minister delegate for European affairs, Jean-Pierre Jouyet, headed Jacques Delors' cabinet - the effects, in my opinion, are plain to see. The Italian minister for European affairs, Franco Frattini, was a vice president of the Commission a few months ago; this packs some punch, in the positions he takes in a personal capacity as well as in the overall attitude of the Italian government. Peter Mandelson is also obviously marked by his understanding of Brussels and will take this with him in his new role in the United Kingdom. I am not saying that he is no longer a convinced liberal in the trade arena but he will better understand the conditions to which opening up the borders are subject. Even outside active political life, there are so many former Commissioners who display the experience of their past, from Karel Van Miert to Mario Monti, from Manuel Marin to Peter Sutherland and many others!
(F.R./transl.rh)