[A-List] EU integration struggles: Franco-German axis

["Michael Keaney" <michael.keaney@xxxxxx>]

Big two define Europe's future

Delight and unease have greeted a historic pact between France and Germany
that is likely to decide how the expanded union will operate

Ian Black in Brussels
Thursday January 16, 2003
The Guardian

A landmark agreement between France and Germany on two separate presidents
for the European Union appeared last night to have paved the way for a new
division of labour between national capitals and the union.

Reactions were mixed as governments digested a messy compromise between
traditionally competing visions of how an enlarged EU should work - the
fruit of months of effort to revive the historic axis between Paris and
Berlin.

Britain and other big member states were delighted, but critics warned that
the controversial blueprint could generate new institutional rivalries.

Key details remained to be clarified about exactly what the French
president, Jacques Chirac, and the German chancellor, Gerhard Schröder, had
agreed on Tuesday. But the plan is likely to have a huge influence on the
EU's future constitutional arrangements.

The proposals cleverly occupy the middle ground of the intensifying debate
about the future of the EU, and were attacked by Eurosceptics and
integrationists alike. Small countries and the European commission sounded
uneasy.

Mr Chirac, strongly backed by Tony Blair, secured the German chancellor's
agreement to a permanent president for the EU council of ministers, where
the union's 15 governments, soon to be 25, make policy.

In return Mr Schröder persuaded France to accept that the president of the
commission be elected by the European parliament, instead of being nominated
in a quiet stitch-up between governments, as at present.

If implemented, the proposals will boost the weight of the nation state and
increase the democratic legitimacy of the commission, which proposes and
enforces laws.

But integrationists, even senior members of the participating governments,
are unlikely to be satisfied by the Franco-German fudge. The German foreign
minister, Joschka Fischer, who fought hard for a single "super-president",
said last night he was disappointed at the outcome.

"It was very, very difficult to find a compromise," he said. "We wanted a
joint initiative."

Mr Blair or Jose Maria Aznar, his Spanish counterpart, have often been
mentioned as possible candidates for the first European president, who would
serve a five-year or a renewable 2-year term.

The plan is likely to set the tone at the Convention on the Future of
Europe, where the former French president, Valéry Giscard d'Estaing, is
charged with drawing up a constitution by this summer.

"Any time the French and Germans agree on something, it increases the
chances of that being the final outcome," said David O'Sullivan, the
commission's top civil servant.

But the devil is in the detail. The union's Heath Robinson structures are
complex and rarely understood outside the Brussels beltway. And though the
plan may satisfy Paris and Berlin, there are doubts over how it will work.

"It is more a barter deal than a genuine compromise," said Andrew Duff, the
Liberal Democrat MEP. "Neither could agree to each other's proposal, so they
accepted both."

Romano Prodi, the commission's president, has strongly opposed the idea of a
president of the council, fearing an attempt to weaken his role. "We have to
make sure we don't end up with the problem... of two competing power
centres," his spokesman warned.

Brussels's experience of dual leadership is not encouraging. Since 1999, EU
external relations have been handled by Javier Solana of Spain for member
states and Chris Patten for the commission. Many believe another such
arrangement at the highest level could suffer from similar problems of
coordination and overlapping responsibilities.

"If there were a double presidency, there would one day be a conflict of
legitimacy and cohabitation," warned François Bayrou, an ally of Mr Chirac.

Spain and Italy also back the idea of a powerful president of the council,
pleased to have avoided the "nightmare option" pushed by Mr Fischer: a
"super-president" of council and commission that would erode the
carefully-policed boundaries between the national and the supranational.

Smaller states such as the Netherlands and Belgium fear a power grab by
governments at the expense of the commission and the European parliament.
But there are signs that this may change. Denmark said yesterday that it
could accept a system under which a president of the council was chosen in
turn from groups of different-sized member states.

Sweden has already defected to the pro-presidency camp while Portugal is
said to be warming to the idea. Finland could probably live with it.

The proposals will require far-reaching changes to the system of the
rotating EU presidency, under which each member state runs the union's
business for six months. With 25 members, that would mean every country
would do the job every 12 years. Team efforts are likely to replace the
current system.

The Franco-German alliance has agreed several common objectives:

Institutions

A dual presidency marrying France's 'nation state' vision with Germany's
more federal view. President of the commission to be elected by MEPs.
President of European Council to be elected by council members for set term.

Britain: Unenthusiastic about president of commission, and places greater
emphasis on its own idea of a president of the European Council.

Foreign policy

New European foreign minister 'attached to the council' but also 'integrated
into the comission' Post would combine roles of external relations
commissioner (Chris Patten) and foreign policy and common security chief
(Javier Solana).

Britain: Opposed to merging of roles, and wants Solana's role strengthened.

Tax and economy

Alignment of corporate tax and VAT across the union. Foundation of European
centre for international economics to formulate plans for collective trade
and finance policies.

Britain: Will not sign up for harmonisation of taxation or social security.

Defence

A full EU defence union, with a mutual defence guarantee and pooled defence
procurement (maybe even a European armament agency) to cut waste. Progress
towards this to be possible by a minority vote, and decisions made by
qualified majority voting in other instances.

Britain: Backs pooled procurement and cooperation. Opposes extending tasks
of European defence to include common defence as this would conflict with
Nato.

Justice and home affairs

Common asylum policy would use qualified majority voting. Creation of a new
force of European border guards, an EU prosecution service and setting up of
pan-European criminal records.

Britain: Supports QMV for asylum, but opposes common criminal code.

Bilateral agreements

France and Germany to work towards parallel legislation in areas like civil
and family law, and try to harmonise qualifications. Each country will
appoint a 'general secretary for Franco-German co-operation'.

Britain: Continues to hold bilateral summits.

Jon Henley