RSS

In the wake of the Irish "no" vote to the Lisbon Treaty, Germany's chancellor and Poland's president have questioned the further ratification of the Treaty. Their declarations, however unwelcomed by most Europhiles, act as a reminder that European citizens do have the final say regarding their future. Following the Dutch and French "no" vote on the inaptly named European Constitutional Treaty and the subsequent attempts at implementation despite the referenda results, the irony of the current situation ought not to be lost.

Still, there's no room to rejoice. This new rejection adds to the list of gaps currently marring the EU: institutional, social, political, and strategic (the EU's role in the world.) Yet, to anyone accustomed to European politics, the current state of affairs is actually the usual state of affairs. Despite the glossy and smooth documentation handed to visitors to European institutions highlighting the "ever-closer Union", recent (and not so recent) history is made of deadlocks, rethinking and crisis.

Does Europe need rethinking?

No, it does not; the European laboratory of politico-institutional concepts adapts permanently to new situations and re-visits itself periodically. While calls for a "European federation" may come to halt in the coming years, the multiplication of "strengthened cooperation" in scope and in depth is quite likely to increase - after all, the essence of the European Community (EURATOM, CECA) are primitive forms of strengthened cooperation, ESA, the Euro or ESDP are others.

Has Europe reached a deadlock?

Neither. Publicly hailed as a victory but downplayed by experts, the Nice Treaty has not blocked the European construction. While adjustments and creativity will remain the operating principles for the coming years, it is unlikely that a deadlock has been reached. On the other hand, a genuine deadlock possibility may arise at the end of 2013 with the expiration of the current "financial perspective" and the new round of negotiations. Unless the global economy picks up, the governments of Europe's founding nations will be hard pressed to explain why they should remain net contributors - especially, in the Franco-British case if the CAP and the British cheque disappear.

Do Europeans need new incentives?

Clearly the question is no longer about institutional arrangements but rather about food and energy costs. The French presidential debate focused on the "cost of life," an concern that neighboring Belgium and other European countries also share. Should the euro/dollar exchange evolve to the benefit of the dollar, European energy costs would dramatically increase and the uncertainty would affect future perspectives. To make matters worse, social evolution in European countries in favor of direct consultation and participatory systems has reduced the authority of qualified experts and elected representatives. Combining these two trends, a medium term forecast could be that populations will turn more towards the EU for answers rather than to their respective governments, only to be further disappointed as the EU is not a government and thus cannot be of much help in these fields.

To what extent will recent developments influence the French EU presidency?

Interestingly, the French presidency gifts (the usual ties, pens, and carry-on) are surprisingly sober - designer made of course, but sober nonetheless. This may be an indication that the French government, even before the "no" vote was well aware of the numerous challenges ahead. President Sarkozy's approach seems to concentrate on giving a political impetus where bureaucrats once sat - the proposed ESA reform being the case in point. The emphasis on the Mediterranean Union is a call for the development of a strategic vision (bearing in mind that the process of the White Book on defense has just finished.) While the first issue caters to the aspiration of a greater European legitimacy and accountability - something European citizens may be sensible to; the second issue caters to the aspiration of a greater European global responsibility - something European governments may not be sensible to as they deal mostly with regional concerns. The remaining parts of the agenda will likely belong to the category of necessary tweaks and fixes.

Finally, because Transatlantic issues matter and the US-Czech Republic missile defense radar deal was signed on July 8^th, EU-US relations for the next six months and beyond should be closely followed. Gearing in for NATO 60^th anniversary summit in 2009, developing European capacities is a good idea but the room for miscalculations will be small. The coming US election in November will be an opportunity for a 300m+ citizen French president to greet the 300m+ citizen US President-elect before the first one leaves and the second is sworn in, yet, no matter how much forward will Europeans look into the post-Bush era, it is unlikely that his successor will undo his legacy, perhaps much to most Europeans' dismay.

Pierre Drai is a consultant in the field of international affairs with a special focus on transatlantic relations. He is the current director and one of the founders of the think tank "Centre d'Etudes Transatlantiques" based in Paris.

Related materials from the Atlantic Community:

• Stephanie von Hayek: Europe so Close Yet so Far
• Transatlantic Press Round-Up: France Adopts a Multilateral Defense Policy
• Marek Swierczynski: Sarkozy Re-Ignites the EU Enlargement Row