Marseilles, 03/11/2008 (Agence Europe) - The EuroMed ministerial conference, the first since the "Summit of Paris" which launched the Union for the Mediterranean (UfM) on 13 July, opened late on Monday 3 November in Marseilles. The meeting is due to last two days, which have been predicted to be tough due to the scale of differences of opinion over the political chapter, amongst others. The French Presidency of the EU nonetheless appeared optimistic: "There are difficulties, but they are being resolved", said Henri Guaino, special adviser to French President Nicolas Sarkozy on UfM issues, before the session opened. After the "historical success" of the "Summit" of Paris, "everybody has got to work to draft the functioning rules of this Union and to make progress in the projects which will be its heart", said the main inspiration for French foreign policy, in an interview published in the local press in Marseilles, in which he went on to specify two important elements: firstly, the fact that there is an agreement with the forthcoming Czech Presidency of the Council of the EU to keep France in place as co-president after its six-monthly European mandate has expired and secondly, the fact that Marseilles is standing - with Barcelona as its main rival - to host the Secretariat General of the UfM. Tunis, which is visibly peeved by its failure, has thrown in the towel. Malta remains in contention. The ministers will decide on this issue, or a temporary solution - which has been formally proposed - may be retained, making Brussels the temporary headquarters of the new structure.
Officially, the agenda indicates that the ministers will be invited to make an interim stock-take of new concrete projects of the partnership, as defined by the "Summit" of July. They are called upon to decide the conditions for their implementation, stressing the six priority areas then identified. They will have to adopt the working programme for 2009, which will raise the question of funding. They will have to specify this for their colleagues with "sectorial" responsibilities, who will have to meet throughout next year to launch the projects retained (cleaning up the pollution of the Mediterranean, Mediterranean solar plan, civil protection, higher education and research, transport and the development of small and medium-sized enterprises).
The main thrust of the debates, however, has already focused, during the preparatory meetings at high-level civil servant and ambassador level, on the "details of the new governance" introduced since the "Summit" of Paris. One of the aspects of this governance, which aims to reinforce parity, has already been applied: this is the co-Presidency system, conferred upon Egypt for a mandate of two years, and upon France. In this latter case, it is clearly stipulated in the draft final declaration that the duration of this mandate will be decided upon in application of the rules which govern the functioning of European mechanics (basically that France will pass the baton to the Czech Republic at the end of December). However, Mr Guaino clearly indicates that an exception will be made in this case. In his interview with La Provence, he explains that there has been an "agreement made with the Czech Presidency, which will leave the co-Presidency (of the UfM) to France (and this is, he says) an important step. I believe that in Marseilles, we will be able to find a reasonable solution to ensure a certain continuity for the UfM". Because, Mr Guaino continues, the UfM is an "original political construct for which new rules must be invented".
The other aspect focuses on the architecture to be given to the joint structures, first and foremost its Secretariat General. The choice of a location for the headquarters and the name of a person to occupy the function are at the heart of the controversy, and the opposing positions do not follow a clear "North-South" line. Tunis, Barcelona, Malta or Marseilles. The debate has been tough and remains so. Egypt is insistent that the structure should be located in a country on the south shore of the Mediterranean, unlike Syria and Lebanon, which are opposed to the de facto normalisation of relations with Israel this would pre-suppose and, lastly, Algeria is believed to be in favour of Brussels. Some have not ruled out the idea that the Belgian capital could be appointed on a temporary basis, whilst the definitive decision is made. The affair appears to have taken a somewhat exaggerated turn, mainly due to the political context having been exacerbated by the "omissions" in the Paris declaration, which have not gone unnoticed by the group of Arab countries.
At the bottom of this is the status to be granted to the Arab League, to which President Sarkozy is believed in July to have promised an active role in Euromed dialogue, and also the lack of a reference to the "Arab peace initiative", actually a Saudi Arabian initiative called for by the Arab League and given lukewarm support by certain Arab countries, notably the Egyptian co-Presidency. Israel refuses both rectifications. The EU is going for a neutral position, declaring that it is prepared to accept any compromise agreeable to both protagonists in the Middle East conflict. The Arab group has accused it of double play and of siding with Israel. "Nobody ever thought that the UfM would miraculously remove all of the tragedies" of the region, said Henri Guaino, calling on the two sides to "work together to get to know each other, to respect each other and, who knows, perhaps one day to love each other". On the role of the Arab League, there are, he said, more important things than to "know under what conditions the League may take the floor or where it may put its commas in these interminable declarations on the peace process, which do not move the cause of peace forward a centimetre". These words went down badly with certain Arab countries, which believed that Europe should declare its colours and play an active role.
It seems patently obvious, however, that although such enormous controversies over the appreciation of the situation in the Middle East have been noted in the past, in practically all of the ministerial sessions of the EuroMed process, the risk of breakdown was not evaded on Monday morning. EuroMed dialogue now seems subject to unprecedented rows and reconsiderations, as demonstrated by the fact that the meetings have been postponed at various levels, including, very recently, at ministerial level (in Jordan on water). The new climate brought about since the Paris "Summit" has left a number of uncertainties as to the outcome of this annual meeting. Paris, however, seems to have put it into perspective: "nobody will take responsibility for a clash", a high-level civil servant predicts. (F.B./transl.fl)