CIAO DATE: 11/04

The State of the European Union

H.E. Inge Kristoffersen
Consul General of Belgium

Occasional Paper Series No. 47

December 17, 2001

European Union Studies Center

The Summit at Laeken meant the end of Belgium Presidency. When we took the Presidency we had a very ambitious program. The main point is that the program was to be the Declaration of Laeken that was going to discuss all the aspects of the future EU as we are facing a very big enlargement with no less than 10 member states. That was the agenda before September 11. The event of September 11 altered the Presidency’s agenda, and the focus shifted on several other points. In the aftermath, the urgency and the dynamic of the political dialog became even more urgent, because EU is an important actor in the international scene, and the EU at this instant should play a very stabilizing role in the battle against violence and terrorism. Together with European Commission, the Belgian Presidency undertook a coordinated and diplomatic effort to enhance the solidarity to the alliance created with the US in their fight against terrorism and also in the re-launching of peace process in the Middle East . In spite of this shifting priorities, British Presidency kept its agenda and submitted a number of proposals to the European Council, which included the future of the EU and the Declaration of Laeken, international affairs with the accent on European Policy, Security and Defense, the enlargement, the fight against terrorism, the creation of the area of freedom security and justice in Europe, economic situation and further developments, employment and social cohesion, seats of institutions to be created and external relations.

Since the fall of the Berlin Wall and the disappearance of the Soviet Union more than ten years ago, Europe has fundamentally changed. At the beginning of this century we are preparing for another leap forward both regarding the size and internal functioning of the EU. Now, the Union is facing an enlargement that will change the nature of the Union itself. The European population is increasingly unhappy with the lack of transparency and the lack of insight in how the decisions are being taken in Brussels. The accession of possibly twelve new member states makes a thorough revision of treaties and institutions a necessity. The revolt of the enlargements will be great, but EU of the future will not come into being without the support of the citizens and the commitments of the national leaders, who need to make respective populations understand what advantages Europe has to offer.

At this time the low turns out for European elections is a measure of popular indifference to the European institutional system. Because political legitimacy is at a crisis world wide, we had it also in the US where the participation in the last year’s elections was extremely low, it is necessary to build for the future institutional reform as broad a basis as possible in order to make the larger union viable. A large universal debate is already underway. The Laeken council opened a new chapter in its history with the decision to create a special constitutional convention that could eventually lead to a European constitution in 2004. Belgium’s Presidency put a tremendous effort in reaching an agreement on this declaration. It proved worthwhile. In a far-reaching declaration on the future of Europe, the EU leaders set out their aim on bridging the gap between the EU and its citizens calling on the Union to become more democratic, more transparent and more efficient. The first part of this text covers the strengths and the weaknesses of European construction, the second part gathers together all specific issues that could be included in a possible agreement later, and the third part determines how the debate will be organized. The debate of this convention is not going to be easy. Reform minded people in Scandinavian and smaller member countries are already calling for greater participation of the people of Europe in a decision making process. They ask inter alia for more direct elections of European leadership and for the abolition of unanimity. Others argue that Europe cannot adopt a federal system like the US. The most vocal in this side is, of course, Tony Blair. In March 2002, under the Spanish Presidency, this convention will meet for a year and will stick to establishing again a link between the necessary reformations of the EU and the expectations of the Europeans. It would be followed by an intergovernmental conference in 2004 where member states will negotiate changes to the EU’s treaties to enable the Union to cope with the enlargement from fifteen to as many as twenty-five and later on maybe twenty-eight or twenty-nine member states. Participation in the convention by representatives of various governments, the European Commission, the respective national parliaments, and European Parliament, is certain. It is the first time that the national parliamentarians will be together with their European counterparts, and also all the candidate member states will participate in the convention. They will be fully involved in the work done by the convention and will have the right to express their views. They will be represented in the same way as the actual member states, and those candidate countries, who have not yet signed their treaty of accession by the time the convention will finish its activities, will not be able to participate in the decision making process.

There is also almost a unanimous feeling that people should be consulted via European and national representative bodies.

It was very well understood that there is the need to consult people to make the future of the EU more viable. A forum was set up to make it possible to give structure to and broaden the debate on the future of the Union. In particular, it is a shared concern to ensure that a future closer involvement in the workings of the union of the actors of society does not have a detrimental effect on the central role played by the representative authorities, which bear the political responsibility. As for the specific issues that are going to be covered by the convention, the Belgiam Presidency’s approach started out with the content of Nice Declaration and drawing up a sufficiently broad and consistent mandate to inspire the Presidency throughout its work. It endeavors to explain and build upon those issues raised in Nice, which were deliberately left open.

Regardless of the final contents of the Laeken declaration, the convention retained the final words on its agenda. It will serve no purpose to seek to box it in to a predefined mandate. Nothing of what the European Council proposed in this manner should be interpreted as a mandate for the future conference. The mandate of that intergovernmental conference will be determined according to procedures laid down in respective treaties. Finally, the aim of Laeken declaration is to ensure that the method of the convention is fruitful and that its results are taken up by the 2004 intergovernmental conference. The second point on the agenda, again closely linked to enlargement, external relations and future of Europe, is the European Policy on Security and Defense (ESDP). This common policy was enshrined in the Treaty of Maastricht and further refined by the Treaties of Amsterdam and Nice. It gives the fifteen a tool for focusing their views, speaking with a single voice in the international bodies, and expressing the EU’s position on armed conflicts, human rights, and any other topic of significant international importance. That tool is effectively working here, in the UN, where before every debate there, is a coordination between the fifteen, and the Presidency speaks in the name of the fifteen and also the candidate countries.

At Laeken the European Council adopted a declaration on the operational capability of the ESDP. Throughout the continuing development of this policy, the strengthening of its capabilities, both civil and military, and the creation of its appropriate structure to go within it, the Union is now capable of conducting some crisis management operations. It is determined to quickly finalize the arrangements with NATO to this effect. It has to be noted, however, that the operational capability of the EU remains rather limited. The EU has no ways for intelligence gathering or for the transportation of troops. The technological gap between the arsenals of the US and ECU is becoming bigger and bigger. This means, for the immediate future at last, that the EU will have limited operations in humanitarian and evacuation actions under the direction of the military staff of one member state, which is for example today the case in Kosovo under the lead of the British.

The heads of the states and governments are giving strong support to the enlargement, enshrining it to the declaration of Laeken and thus making it an irreversible fact. They say that ten countries could be ready to join by 2004. That means that the EU is determined to bring the accession negotiations with the candidate countries to a close by the end of 2002, so that they can join the Union by 2004 and be able to participate in the European elections. Candidacies, however, will continue to be assessed on their own merits in accordance with the principle of differentiation. If the present rate of progress in the negotiations and reforms is maintained, Cyprus, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia, The Czech Republic and Slovenia, could be ready to join. The heads of states and governments insisted, however, that these countries should make a big effort in improving their administrative and judicial structures, a reference to institutions that are still too weak to combat corruption and its management, or to implement EU legislation. At the same time, renewed attention has to be paid to ensuring that the candidate countries comply with the requirement to implement the existing body of Community Law, the acquis communitaire. The Laeken European Council provided the opportunity for the heads of states and government to send out the following messages to the candidate countries:

“The timetable will be fully respected. At the beginning of 2002, the Commission will submit proposals on agriculture and budgetary policy on the basis of the present acquis. Proceedings on the drafting of the accession treaties will begin early next year. The implementation by the Commission of a plan to allocate 250 million Euros is an attempt to strengthen the institutions in the candidate countries and make them more ready for market economy and democratic elections.”

The fourth and very important point in the agenda was the fight against terrorism. The Presidency submitted to the Laeken Council a brief report summing up the measures adopted by the Union to fight terrorism. This report also looks towards the future. Where the fight against terrorism is concerned, the Union reacted swiftly and effectively. The response was global, which gives the steps it took an added value. The EU has established itself as a credible and efficient partner, on which the US and other countries can count for support in the fight against terrorism. The Union and the Euro-zone have helped to stabilize the economy in what have been very turbulent times for all of us.

Finally, the sustained efforts required fort the fight against terrorism did not, however, lead the Presidency to neglect other priority issues in European construction. At Laeken the EU once again reaffirmed its total solidarity with the American people and the international community in combating terrorism with full regard for individual rights and freedoms. The plan of action decided by European Council on 21 of September, just after the events in the United States, is being implemented in accordance with the timetable set.

The fifth point on the agenda was the establishing of an area of freedom, security and justice. It is very important to establish such an area especially in the New World situation. The European Council reaffirmed its commitment to the policy guidelines and objectives defined in Finland, years ago, and noted that there was indeed a need for a new impetus. Unfortunately, the guidelines and timetable set up were not quite on schedule. The Council undertook to adopt as soon as possible a common policy on asylum and immigration, which will maintain the necessary balance between the protection of refugees, the legitimate aspiration to a better life, and also the reception capacities of the Union and its member states. The European Council furthermore asked the Council of Ministers to submit by April the 30th amended proposals concerning the asylum procedures. The Council also asked the Council of Minister to bolster and strengthen the instruments for cooperation between the police and judicial authorities, which means the definite establishment of a new agency called “Euro-juste”. This points to the cooperation between all the different Ministers of Justice.