Never has the long-idealized concept of a European Union looked as wobbly as right now — a concept that for years has looked great on paper but seems to be falling apart at the seams due to individual nations’ votes and individual nations’ self interest.
Just listen to EU President Luxembourg Prime Minister Jean-Claude Juncker, after the EU ended a two day summit:””Europe is not in a state of crisis — it’s in a state of profound crisis…I have to say my enthusiasm for Europe has suffered a severe setback today.”
Those are not exactly words that ooze confidence and emit a feeling of institutional stability for a good reason: the EU seems at somewhat of an impasse right now. CNN reports:
British officials rejected a budget plan for the years 2007-2013 because they said it did not contain sufficient guarantees that the EU’s system of agricultural subsidies would be overhauled, in return for Britain agreeing to freeze a rebate it receives in compensation for its outsized net contribution to the EU.
The budget requires approval of all 25 EU member states, so it cannot go into force with Britain’s approval.
“We simply weren’t able to bring people together sufficiently to get an agreement,” said Jose Manual Barroso, the president of the European Commission, the EU’s executive arm.
“We are saddened. We are concerned. But I’m sure it’s not the first time we’ve found ourselves in difficulty. I’m sure we’ll come up with some solution.”
It was the first summit of EU leaders since voters in France and the Netherlands rejected its proposed constitution two weeks ago. The “No” votes were seen as a profound blow to European integration.
The danger in the present crisis: international and national politics all require a certain momentum, which depends on a certain amount of positive imagery. There is little surrounding the EU these days. In fact, the countries seem at verbal war with each other. The Sun-Herald has this:
The summit breakdown threatens the enlarged 25-nation bloc with financial paralysis on top of the political uncertainty wrought by the double referendum defeats, unnerving financial markets and weakening the euro, the EU’s single currency.
In a welter of recrimination, many leaders blamed Britain for blocking a deal on the 2007-2013 budget by rejecting proposals to limit its annual rebate from EU coffers and demanding a reform of farm subsidies that benefit France most.
“Europe is in a deep crisis,” French President Jacques Chirac told a midnight news conference, blaming “the selfishness of two or three rich countries” for the failure.
But the recrimination doesn’t end there. MORE:
German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder blamed British and Dutch obduracy for what he called “one of the worst crises Europe has known”.
But British Prime Minister Tony Blair was defiant, insisting London had not been isolated since four other west European countries – the Netherlands, Sweden, Finland and Spain – had opposed the deal, and vowing he would only trade a reduction in the rebate for an overhaul of EU farm spending.
Asked if others had tried to isolate him, Mr Blair said: “If that was the attempt, it failed. We weren’t alone around the table in resisting this. I think people know exactly what the issues are here and I don’t think they’ll be fooled by any tactics and maneuvers.”
You can read more gloomy, frustrated, angry and blame-pointing reactions of European leaders by CLICKING HERE.
What’s going on? The BBC reports:”The failure of European leaders to agree on the future shape of the union’s budget throws into perspective two very different visions of what the EU should be about.” And it outlines these two visions:
- “The UK refused to give up its rebate without guarantees that the budget, and particularly the Common Agricultural Policy (Cap), would be fundamentally reformed. In a nutshell, the UK wants less spent on farm subsidies and more on research, and other programmes to make the European economy more competitive.”
- The other vision, held most firmly by France, Germany, Luxembourg and Belgium, sees the distribution of subsidies at the heart of the EU’s mission. The watchword is “solidarity” – solidarity between rich and poor countries, between rich and poor regions, and solidarity with farmers and the rural economy. From this perspective the UK rebate was justified when the UK was one of the EU’s poorest countries, but is not justified now that it is one of the richest.
BOTTOM LINE: Right now the EU is on the ropes. However, those who are proclaiming it dead are probably making premature announcements. Any organization or group that has formed undergoes problems in its creation and, often, early operation. There has to be a give and take and much compromise.
The concept of the EU is likely to stay alive but it may take much longer than its boosters anticipated for it to materialize into full, working reality. It must overcome centuries of nation-state patterns and resentments so that the new union’s “self-interest” becomes each country and its leaders’ “self-interest.” The issues each country’s leaders and voters face at present seem too compartmentalized for unity to trump national reservations. But that can change…
UPDATE: The Financial Times has an interesting analysis that should be read in full. A small taste 4 U:
Tony Blair’s decision to veto the European Union’s potential budget deal on Friday will trigger accusations across mainland Europe that he has seriously damaged Britain’s imminent presidency of the EU.
Back in Britain, the prime minister’s determination to stand up to Jacques Chirac, French president, will elicit the opposite reaction. It will trigger applause from a mostly eurosceptic press that would have vilified the prime minister if he had negotiated away Britain’s rebate on its EU contributions. But by vetoing the budget deal and defending the rebate so zealously Mr Blair will find it harder to guarantee a successful presidency.
Britain is keen to get the EU to approve a wide range of initiatives over the next six months including the start of talks over Turkey’s entry into the EU and passage of the services directive. Having stood up so boldly for Britain’s national interest last night, the prime minister may now find it harder to present himself as a conciliator who can persuade member states to make compromises.
Joe Gandelman is a former fulltime journalist who freelanced in India, Spain, Bangladesh and Cypress writing for publications such as the Christian Science Monitor and Newsweek. He also did radio reports from Madrid for NPR’s All Things Considered. He has worked on two U.S. newspapers and quit the news biz in 1990 to go into entertainment. He also has written for The Week and several online publications, did a column for Cagle Cartoons Syndicate and has appeared on CNN.