Seven expected confirmations. Everything went according to plan at Sunday's informal European Council but there were a few informative elements were also added. The seven general positions taken were already expected and had in fact already been obtained: 1) confirmation of the single market as an essential element in European construction, as well as the commitment to respect the rules on this issue; 2) regulation and monitoring of all financial activities; 3) re-establishing conditions for financing economy by releasing credit lines and underlining importance of tackling banks' toxic debts; 4) coordination of national plans in car industry; 5) respecting the long term viability of public sector funding and the subsequent budgetary balance in keeping with the Stability and Growth Pact rules; 6) taking action against the negative impact of crisis on employment; 7) emphasising the EU's leading role in orientations and decision making at a global level (particularly at the next G20).
These seven essential points had already previously been clarified by the EU Council's (Economy/finance, Energy, General Affairs) groupings. It is perhaps useful that they were reaffirmed at the highest political level, even if this summit did not appear to be a great crowd pleaser.
Among some of the supplementary details mentioned in the press release (more like orientations than an official text, see the following pages) I would highlight “the confidence in the role of the Commission as guardian of the Treaty” (a remark regarded as opportunistic by the Eurosceptics who are fighting for an intergovernmental Europe) and the explicit reference to the role of the European Investment Bank (EIB) for supporting the banks of member states in Central and Eastern Europe.
Central and Eastern Europe do not make up a separate block. Ultimately, the most important aspect involves member states from Central and Eastern Europe: Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania and Bulgaria. In their preliminary meeting, the Hungarian prime minister, Ferenc Gyurcsány, suggested collective EU action to support them through a special EU fund of between €160-190bn. This formula was rejected by both the countries concerned and member states from the rest of the EU. Angela Merkel demolished the idea as soon as she arrived in Brussels, before the summit began, and affirmed that a debate around astronomical amounts of money was a waste of time and the situation in member states in the area in question was not at all the same. The EU has already proved its solidarity to these countries and would do so again by making decisions on a case by case basis. This is the orientation included in the press release.
Most of the countries concerned, with the Czech Presidency of the EU at the head of them, also rejected the idea of representing a specific block inside the EU. The question is not only an economic one but is political too. Since their accession, these countries have wanted to be considered as ordinary member states and the distinction between old and new member states is no longer made in Brussels. Mr Gyurcsány himself explained that he rejected the idea of a new iron curtain and said that the goal is reuniting Europe financially and economically. Ultimately, the final statement already quoted, devotes its most expansive paragraph to Central and Eastern Europe (it is not included in the initial draft, and: -underlines the advantages provided by European integration ; - calls on Western banks not to limit the activities of their subsidiaries in the East;- encourages Community institutions to use all instruments available to help member states confront temporary imbalances; - quotes, as an example, the joint EIB, EBRD and World Bank action announced in EUROPE 9850.
The uniting characteristic of the EU has therefore been reaffirmed. Possible future divisions resulting from positions taken towards the Lisbon Treaty will not have a geographical characteristic.
I believe that what ultimately counts is the special summit having done its duty; it is absurd to have expected new guidelines from it, after those defined at the Berlin meeting that brought together European figures who will participate at the G20 summit (see this column in EUROPE 9848). The informal but clear reaffirmation of compulsory conditions for joining the eurozone was appropriate, with the possibility of introducing flexibility to the standard requirement of prior membership of the European exchange mechanism: a two year period doesn't seem necessary (except as a legal pretext used by Sweden for not participating). In the meantime, preparations for operational initiatives are making progress; the Commission will begin its initiatives this very week. This is what counts. (F.R./transl.rh)