European construction

On the 6th of May, after six hours of debate, the Czech Senate ratified the European Union’s Treaty of Lisbon. The approval was accepted with great relief by the 26 other Member States as well by the Republic itself. The President of the European Commission – Jose Manuel Barrosso- saluted the positive vote, regarding it as a reflection ‘of the Czech Republic’s commitment to a more democratic accountable, effective and coherent European Union’. It must be stressed that the voting outcome brings the Treaty one step closer to coming into force by the beginning of 2010. Nonetheless, the Czech President Vaclav Klaus, observes a strict denial in signing the Treaty.

Source: European Commission Audiovisual Service

The European Union celebrated on Saturday 9th of May, the anniversary of Schumann Declaration that set the European integration in motion in 1950. In a celebrating mood of the Festival of Europe’s Open Day, the European Institutions opened their doors to the public, holding a series of events such as educational activities and series of cultural events. The main aim of the activities was to bring the European Union closer to its citizens and to inform them on the positive impact the Union has on their lives. This year’s celebration has been of great importance as it is only a few weeks before the European elections (4th – 7th of June). In the celebratory climate, President Hans-Gert Pöttering said: “European politics affect every aspect of your daily lives: the environment, health, consumerism, work, equal opportunities… There are decisions to make in every one of these areas, and the European representatives elected by the citizens will have to make those decisions for the next five years. This is what is at stake on June 7: the choice is up to the voters!”

Source: European Commission Audiovisual Service

Six months ago, the French presidency of the European Council was expected with eagerness, but also with apprehension and a lot of suspense. French president Nicolas Sarkozy opened his inaugural speech before the European Parliament with the assertion “Europe cannot be condemned to inaction”. And, as expected, after six months the French demonstrated an unexpected work rhythm that is unlikely to be maintained by the upcoming Czech presidency. However, the rejected Lisbon Treaty by the Irish cast a cloud over the start of the presidency. Some months later the war between Russia and Georgia broke out during the president’s holidays. The crisis was not yet completely resolved, when the financial downturn reached the top of the French presidency’s agenda. Only through a second attempt did Sarkozy manage to achieve common actions in the euro-zone. Despite these turbulent times, even critical voices have complimented the omnipresent Nicolas Sarkozy. Within the crisis, the French also managed to accomplish their initial programme for the presidency around the issues of climate change and energy, the reform of the agricultural policy, Europe´s defence policy as well as an immigration pact. Only the question of the future of the Lisbon Treaty remains. The Czech presidency will be measured on its successful resolution of the rejection of the Treaty.

Photo: www.ue2008.fr; Elysée

When the 27 head of states signed the Lisbon Treaty on December 13th 2007, there was hope that the simplified Treaty would, this time, come into force in January 2009. All contentious points and symbols had been left out, and the new Treaty concentrated only on the urgently needed institutional reforms. However, the tables quickly turned: On 12th June the Irish – Ireland was the only country which held a referendum – voted against the Treaty. Yet, 25 member states have ratified the Treaty so far, mostly through their parliaments. Only the Czech Republic has not yet ratified it. While parliaments mainly voted pro-European, referenda in different member states would certainly have led to a different result. Knowledge and undertstanding of the Treaty is prevadingly low. The Irish government seems therewhile constrained to reorganise a referendum. But in an economic downturn and a growing negative atmosphere in Ireland a positive outcome seems close to unachievable.

Photo: www.flickr.com/ Smallisbeautiful

The European Commission should publish this Wednesday 23 July several reports accusing Bulgaria, and to a lesser extent Romania, for the inefficiency of their fight against corruption and for the poor administration of European funds in both countries. These official reports could lead to the freezing of a certain number of European funds provided to Bulgaria, particularly in the framework of the programmes PHARE, ISPA and SAPARD – unless the Bulgarian government manages to convince the Commission that it has implemented strict measures aiming at reversing the trend. However, the parties of the opposition have begun an offensive procedure against the running government, and the vote should take place the 24th, the day after the offical publication of the reports. Should the government fall, a difficult period for the relations between Bulgaria and the reste of the Union could begin.

Belgium has just finalized the ratification of the Lisbon treaty after the text was approved by the Parliaments in Flanders and Brussels. This is the 22nd ratification and it should be followed shortly by votes in Spain and Italy before the summer break. Sweden is set to ratify the treaty in the fall. The Czech republic however is waiting for a decision to be made by its constitutional court on whether a referendum should be held. The Czech president who has always shown little enthusiasm regarding the EU is capitalizing on the NO vote in Ireland. Speaking at the European Parliament this week, Nicolas Sarkozy whose country is presiding the EU for the coming six months said he hoped to find a solution for the Lisbon treaty by the end of the year. He is also getting a challenge from President Kaczynski who refuses to sign the treaty in spite of the positive vote of the Parliament. He argues that after the rejection of the treaty by the Irish, the question of whether he signs it has become irrelevant.

Those are the words of the Irish Prime Minisiter Brian Cowen minutes after it was officially announced that more than 53% of Irish voters rejected the Lisbon treaty in the referendum held on June 12th. He explained that the EU had already been in this situation and always found a solution. He insisted that his country did not wish to halt the progress of a union “fit for the purpose of this century”. The Prime Minister was extremely disappointed and vehemently criticized the no campaign which he characterised as “an orchestrated campaign of confusion.” Asked whether he would consider submitting a second referendum as had already been done for the Nice treaty, Mr Cowen declined to answer, therefore not completely ruling out the possibility. The Prime Minister also argued that the ratification process could continue, the decision to carry it out belonging to the governments of the Member States which still have not ratified the text. This position seems rather isolated as leaders of the no campaign and some pro Lisbon treaty politicians now claim that the treaty is dead.

As in all failed referenda one is tempted to analyse the reasons that pushed the voters to say no. This is especially topical as the Irish government will have to renegotiate the text based on their understanding of the motivations behind the no vote. Interesting task indeed as the reasons are not necessarily coherent and can even be contradictory. Mary Lou McDonald, a Sinn Fein MEP explains for example that the social issues raised by the referendum were the same as those raised by the Dutch and French no vote. On the other hand a very powerful force behind the no campaign was the pro-business voice of Declan Ganley, the millionaire businessman and founder of Libertas, who denounced EU induced red-tape and the prospect of tax harmonization. Articulating a political response to all these concerns will take a lot of thinking outside the box… or it will just lead to a further weakening of the institutional structure of the EU and the European project in general.

That’s the voter turnout measured on the occasion the referendum held last Thursday. This is especially disappointing to many politicians in Dublin and Brussels. A lot of top level officials were convinced that a high turn out would guarantee a victory for the yes and that voter apathy was the greatest hurdle to be cleared. Not so, this turn out is relatively high and proves that the result cannot be attributed to a handful of anti-Europeans rallied by an aggressive campaign. This has further implications, indeed, one of the arguments that was used to justify a second referendum on the Nice treaty (the Irish voters had originally rejected it) was that the turn out had been very low for the first referendum: all of the Irish voters therefore needed another chance to voice their opinion. The argument won’t work twice...

The European leaders were supposed to discuss the rising cost of living during their EU summit of the 19th and 20th of June. Chances are that they will need to focus on finding a political answer to the resounding NO of the Irish people. The Browns, Zapateros, Merkels and Rassmussens may be running out of imagination, after all the Lisbon treaty was already the second version of the European Consitution. It seems unlikely that, the 27 member States (some of which have already ratified both of the original proposals) will agree to go through the process once again as even a parliamentary vote often gives way to intense political battles (the debate in Poland was especially difficult). They will probably call for a continuation of the ratification process until 26 signatures are at the bottom of the treaty. In a 1 against 26 match-up the Irish government will certainly negotiate a couple of opt-outs to be able to claim they have heard the people and adopt a “Lisbon Lite” treaty.

The decisive Irish referendum on the Lisbon Treaty in two months is approaching slowly but surely. In a recent poll two thirds of the Irish stated that they were still undecided on whether to support or reject the treaty. The numbers leave a considerable margin for the campaign that will intensify over the next months. A campaign that is bound to become ugly, populist and with every subject imaginable being used as arguments to reject or accept the treaty. After all, Ireland is the only chance that the sceptics all over Europe will have to block the new treaty. The stakes are high.

That is the number of British members of the House of Commons, who Wednesday voted against submitting the Lisbon treaty to a popular vote. The vote was a victory for Prime Minister Gordon Brown who has been under heavy fire from the Conservatives, who insist that the Lisbon treaty is nothing but a poorly disguised Constitution, which ought to be submitted to a popular vote. The fact that 248 members of the House voted for a popular vote shows to what extent the treaty and EU-politics in general is the object of fierce criticism in the British society. In a recent poll 90 percent of the British stated that they would reject the treaty had they been asked.

Several journalists from Euractiv have lauched a new platform for blogs. The site aims to identify the most popular and notewhorthy blogs on European affairs and give them exposure on the relevant sections of Euractiv. The objective is for Blogactiv to become the point of reference of the emerging online public discussion space on Europe’s future. We welcome the initiative.

Link to Blogactiv.

That’s the number of Irish voters still undecided about the European reform treaty according to a recent poll. Bertie Ahern has a tough battle coming his way to convince all those voters and especially to persuade them not to use this vote to send him a warning. Indeed the Prime Minister is currently implicated in a series of enquiries on payments he received back in the 1990. The Prime Minister does have some leeway in deciding the date of the polls which may be his chance to come out of this tight spot. Mr. Ahern is experiencing pressure pressure from his counterparts as Ireland is the only Member State holding a referendum on the treaty and a NO vote would immediately trigger a deep and long-lasting crisis the EU as we know it might not recover from.

The Grand Mufti of Syria came to address the European Parliament last week and sent a message of peace hardly compatible with Huntington’s “clash of civilisations”. Ahmad Badr Al-Din Hassoun delivered his speech in Strasbourg as part of The European year for intercultural Dialogue. He insisted that the concept of culture was not divisive because there is only one culture, “the culture of mankind”. The spiritual leader rejected the very concept of holy war saying that only peace could be considered holy. He insisted on the importance of education stressing that clashes only happened "where there [was] ignorance, terrorism and backwardness”. He concluded by praising the European Parliament as an example of the miracle of the European Unification process which had managed to overcome two World Wars. He went on to ask MEPs to contribute to the creation of a universal Parliament to complete that process as, in his words, “the world is one”. These admittedly overenthusiastic words are nonetheless rather refreshing in an era of generalized pessimism and resignation and might have inspired a few MEPs not to give up just yet and building an ever closer union.

There will be no referendum on the new treaty in Denmark. The civil servants from the department of justice who had negotiated the treaty, pinpointing what parts of the Constitution should be changed for Denmark not to be legally obliged to hold a referendum, were the same civil servants who gave the treaty its sovereignty check. There was never going to be a referendum. The problem? It does not look good. At all. To the European leaders the treaty provides the institutional framework that enables the Union to move forward. In this way, so the reasoning goes, the EU can deliver results and the Europeans will come to cherish the Union. The problem is that if the EU as a political system is considered illegitimate, the Europeans are not going to appreciate what the EU is doing. Instead they will see illegitimate decisions taken by an illegitimate political system. The new treaty might be good for Europe. But it has only aggravated the commonly held idea that the European politicians take decisions behind the backs of the Europeans. One day the EU will have to face its people.

There will be no referendum on the Lisbon-Treaty in Denmark. It was officially announced Tuesday 11 December by Danish PM Anders Fogh Rasmussen. In his usual strategic way Mr. Rasmussen had sent the treaty to the department of justice for a ’transfer of sovereignty check’ after the treaty-negotiations were completed in October. In this way he could allude to the check being carried out whenever journalists would ask him the explosive question in the run-up to the early November Danish elections that were won by Mr. Rasmussen. Had the Danes held a referendum it would have been a hard blow for the EU. Not so much because of a Danish no. The other 26 would not accept another dead end and would move on and leave Denmark to decide whether the future of the small country should be inside or outside the Union. But a Danish referendum could very easily have triggered a British referendum and that would unquestionably have led to a no. The political realities are that Denmark and Britain do not count the same on the scale and voila…the EU would have found itself in another institutional dead end. Gordon Brown now has one less problem to worry about.

And so the Portuguese had it their way. Thursday 13 December the European leaders duly paid Lisbon a brief visit to put their name on the Reform Treaty, which has now become the Lisbon Treaty. Friday the gentlemen met again – this time in Brussels - for the traditional summit and the last high-profile event of the Portuguese presidency. One outcome of the summit was the troubled birth of one of the darlings of the French President Nicolas Sarkozy. The Council agreed to set up a ’reflection group’ on the future challenges of the EU. Originally Sarkozy’s idea was to include the question of Europe’s borders in the groups and, with that, the question of Turkish membership to the Union. Other member states such as Sweden and Britain sought to avoid the question of Europe’s borders. Instead issues such as climate change and migration were included in the official mandate. However, mandates can be ambiguous as illustrated in the aftermath of the summit when the heads of state and government competed eagerly in defining what the reflection group should and should not reflect upon. Exactly what child the Council has put on earth remains to be seen.