Europe after Sarkozy

On all sides, in both the smaller and the larger countries, European and non-European alike, everyone agrees: under the leadership of Nicolas Sarkozy, a political Europe has existed for the first time on the international scene. The European Union has reached agreement on a common immigration policy. It stood up to Russia during the Georgian crisis. It was the announcement of the EU’s rescue plan, not the American one, which forestalled the collapse of global finance. Despite the crisis, the EU has become the only power to pursue an ambitious policy to fight climate change from now until 2020.

Can we maintain this momentum? I am among those who think that the Czech Republic will give us a pleasant surprise, but it is no criticism of that country to believe that, assuming that such political will exists in Prague, it does not in itself have that kind of driving force. Consequently, all Europeans are wondering whether there is life after Sarkozy for political Europe. Meanwhile, mischievous French observers are asking whether politics will be as important to Nicolas Sarkozy once the EU Council Presidency has come to an end.

It is perfectly possible that the answer in both cases is ‘Yes’. Not least because the France led by Nicolas Sarkozy will continue to play a key role in all the issues that have been raised over the past few months. Let us focus on the two major international meetings to be held next spring. As the instigator of the first G20, which it had prepared in close cooperation with Gordon Brown, France will naturally be a key participant at the next meeting in London, the first to be attended by Barack Obama. A few days later, the NATO Summit will open in Strasbourg, where the core issue under discussion will be the US response to the proposal put forward by Nicolas Sarkozy immediately following his election: France is ready to rejoin the military structure of the Alliance if the Americans finally give the go-ahead to a European defence.

However, given that France will no longer have the authority conferred on it by holding the Presidency of the European Council, it must find other ways of influencing the policies of the 27. This means devising a new type of approach. The French President’s pragmatism should lead him to change what does not work, continue doing what has always worked, and break new ground when it comes to deciding which issues should be addressed.

1 – In future, purely individual initiatives will be strongly discouraged, something that became evident from the launch of the Mediterranean Union, as well as the EU’s coordinated response to rising oil prices last July. Although it may be effective in France, the method of setting the cat among the pigeons and then ignoring the predictable reactions of France’s natural partners, who are then forced to bow to the pressure of public opinion, does not work in Europe: as the Treaties stand at present, a European leader is concerned only with national public opinion, which has a far greater influence on him than any foreign colleague. Therefore, whenever we want to put forward an idea, we need to inform, involve and consult the Presidency-in-Office, our main European partners – who are not necessarily the largest ones – the Commission and the European Parliament.

2 – The historical special relationship between France and Germany is something that really has to be revived. There is certainly no reason why, in a club of nearly 30 members, this relationship should be exclusive. However, it remains a prerequisite for any credible initiative. We should applaud the ‘entente cordiale’ reached since the financial crisis between France and the United Kingdom without entertaining too many illusions about its sustainability. Are our British friends now ready to fulfil the solemn commitments previously made by Tony Blair with regard to joining the euro? Do they agree to relinquish their historic role as intermediary between Washington and Europe now that the French Government has no qualms about negotiating directly with the White House? Will they put an end to their ongoing work to undermine efforts to build a military Europe which, for 10 years, have constantly been at odds with Downing Street’s view on the matter? Even if the fall of the pound sterling helps the current Prime Minister to find his road to Damascus, his younger rival, David Cameron, the strong favourite to win the next election, is proposing, as part of his campaign, that the Conservatives leave the Group of the European People’s Party (EPP), the Union for a People’s Movement (UMP) and the Christian Democratic Union (CDU), whose European commitment he categorically rejects: that should tell us something! There may be a tunnel under the Channel, but there is still a wall between London and Brussels, one that is much stronger than concrete: a wall of prejudices.

3 – It is clearly with regard to deciding which issues should be addressed that France must continue to make every effort to keep politics at the heart of Europe and prevent it from falling into the humdrum routine of agendas in Brussels. Here are three that may well come as a surprise.

– Ireland. Despite the reassuring conclusions of the most recent European Council, the failure of the Irish referendum continues to be an unresolved problem. Ireland’s Prime Minister has pledged to hold a second referendum to remove this obstacle before November. The next European Parliament elections will take place from 4 to 7 June 2009; in Ireland, they will be held on 5 June, the same day as the local elections: weakened by electoral defeat last June, by its management of the financial crisis and by the economic situation that, unfortunately, can be expected next spring, the current Irish Government is highly likely to suffer a severe setback. In which case, how is it possible to imagine that it will be able to win a second referendum on the Lisbon Treaty? Yet it is not too late to adjust the timetable and the strategy. France could help out here, and, in so doing, complete the only business that its Presidency has left unfinished, the failure of which would jeopardise all the achievements of this six-month Presidency.

– The European budget. Behind the institutional crisis brought about by the unsuccessful referendums, the EU is facing an equally serious crisis that seems to have gone unnoticed: the budgetary crisis. Treaty after treaty, year after year, the more Europe’s powers and responsibilities have increased, the greater the expectations have been and the more its financial resources have diminished! In 2009, as a share of total European revenue, the Community budget is to be less than a quarter of the amount that the very Eurosceptic Margaret Thatcher had agreed more than 20 years ago! In a deep economic crisis, while all national budgets are soaring in order to support growth, the EU budget for 2009 has been reduced by EUR 4 billion. No institution or political party has found fault with this; as though there could be more Europe with less money!

This absurd situation is explained by the method of financing the EU budget which is based on contributions from national budgets. As the governments are politically accountable only to their citizens, they refuse to increase their taxes or indebtedness in the common European interest. On this subject, Germany is merely voicing what all the Finance Ministers are constantly advocating.

We are not starting from scratch in addressing this serious and sensitive issue. Members of the European Parliament and the national parliaments have been working on this problem for four years now. A fairly broad consensus is emerging on the diagnosis of the problem, on the political guidelines for the necessary reform, and on the potential avenues to be explored in the search for new resources. Given that political agreement was reached to continue investigations into the problem around 2008–2009, there would be good cause to take strong action.

– The European man in the street. It used to be a well-kept secret, but it eventually broke through the indifference of the media: the People’s Europe is 20 years behind commercial Europe. Last June, I submitted to the President of the French Republic a report on how to deal with the more practical problems of European citizens’ everyday life: the right of residence, labour law, mixed marriages, recognition of qualifications, reimbursement of health-care costs, dual citizenship, and so on. On the basis of the views expressed by the representatives of Europeans living in France and of the Assembly of French Nationals Living Abroad, I have put forward some 60 specific proposals, none of which is costly or requires a new treaty. All that is needed is enough political will to shake up 27 national bureaucracies, plus the EU routine. After the major international issues have been discussed, which subjects are most likely to restore the average person’s faith in Europe? The path ahead has been mapped out; all that is needed is a bulldozer to clear the way…

Alain Lamassoure, 21 December 2008