I am pretty sure that the  pressure on Klaus will be enormous. There are already rumors that Angela Merkel is preparing a “diplomatic sweetener” for him, whatever that means… Taking into account that the Czech Parliament ratified the treaty and the Czech president does not have any powers to veto the treaty,  it is his constitutional obligation to sign it eventually (apparently the problem is that the Czech constitution does not specify how long the President is allowed to postpone his  signature). Obviously he will use the argument that he needs to wait until the constitutional court has issued the ruling on a complaint of some senators. But in the end I am pretty sure that he will sign and that he will not have the guts to wait until the Conservatives form a government in the UK (which might happen next summer)…

However, the wider context is noteworthy: After a almost a decade of debate (Laeken 2001, Convention, Constitutional treaty, …) it seems that we end up with this mini reform treaty. I think most of the other major EU treaties contained more far-reaching reforms than this one. Basically only a couple of things are really innovative:  new double majority voting in more policy areas, a strengthened role for the European Parliament, some clarifications regarding competences, and some improvements in the field of EU foreign policy.

One thing is quite clear, there won’t be another big EU treaty for the foreseeable future  given the difficulty to get such a text ratified by 27 member states. A positive side effect might be that we can finally concentrate on policy issues and leave this institutional debate behind us – at least for a couple of years.  However, the Lisbon Treaty is far from being perfect and it is quite possible that it will create a number of institutional problems. The future will bring new challenges and new reforms might be necessary. And let’s face it: every reform needs to be reformed. So how is it possible to address these challenges and ensure further EU reform, even with 30+ member states (and with people like David Cameron)?

One possibility is to move towards thematic treaties. For example a “issue treaty” on climate change, or one on foreign policy or on police cooperation. These treaties would address one specific issue only – which seems much easier to communicate. These treaties would contain a list of competences for EU institutions as well as national institutions. Moreover, such an issue treaty would address the decision making in this specific policy area and  maybe even include  specific policy aims (reducing emission by 30%, creating a new agency or a new position, banning a certain chemical substance,  introducing a certain measure…whatever). One thing must be included however: if a country rejects one of those treaties, everyone must be clear about the consequences. Basically, a rejection would result in an opt out (similar to Schengen, Euro) but with the possibility to join later.  Of course the result would be an even more complex EU. But maybe this is the price to pay for a bigger and more diverse EU…

• Joschka Fischer: Das vereinte Europa ist gescheitert

  Joschka Fischer has no hope anymore…
  

• Wolfgang Munchau – Europe’s hardball plan B for the Lisbon treaty

  “An alternative would be a referendum with a differently worded question, such as: “Do you want to remain in the EU on the basis of the Lisbon treaty?” Of course, this bundles two questions many people would like to answer separately. Yes, stay in the EU, No to Lisbon. But folding the two into a single question is politically more honest because it is Ireland’s only real-world choice.”

• Robert Kagan – In Europe, a Slide Toward Irrelevance

  Robert Kagan’s take on the Irish ‘NO’ – basically what you would expect from him, but also with a few good points.

• The fear factory devastated Ireland’s flaccid political class

  “You forgot us in Shannon.” — “Our sons are too good-looking for the army” –”right-wing Catholics” — “leftwing anti-militarists” — “a mysterious group that emerged from nowhere with a great deal of money to spend” — “Imported British Euroscepticism” — “a very efficient factory of fears” — “an extensive menu of anxieties” — “the scattergun of negativity only had to hit one sensitive spot”

• Will Hutton: Europe must not be derailed by lies and disinformation
  

  “On top of these there is the political problem that the treaty can’t be rewritten to accommodate specific Irish concerns because it already does; Ireland’s ‘no’ campaigners told lies. The voters’ great concerns had been met. There is a specific protocol that guarantees Ireland’s neutrality and excuses it from membership of any joint European defence effort, if any surfaces. There is no possibility of Ireland being told to enforce abortion. And all states have autonomy over tax policy.”

• The Irish “no” and the rich-poor/urban-rural divide

  “The Irish ‘no’ – like the 2005 French ‘non’ – shows a clear poor/rich and urban/rural divide. Working-class and rural voters are systematically voting against further European integration. European leaders should take note.”

• DJ Nozem: Euroblog Coverage: The Irish ‘No’

  A handy round-up about the Irish ‘No’ in the blogosphere…

The problems with the Irish referendum:

• In any representative democracy a document with 271 pages (479 pages in the consolidated version!) of legal text should never be put to a referendum.
The method of EU treaty ratification should be the same in every member state.
A very weak YES campaign and a quite strong NO campaign.
• The NO campaign managed to put popular myths on the agenda (with no link to the Lisbon Treaty or even to the EU) and mobilised voters with fears; it seems as if the YES campaign did not take it seriously and did not prepare an adequate answer. Next time: professional campaigning needed!

EU has a communication problem… a huge one! And I would include every national politician in this category. In the last 15 years there were too many politicans that constantly blamed the EU (or better “Brussels”) especially when faced with “surprising” EU decisions – and everyone who is a bit familiar with the EU knows that there is no such thing as “surprising” in this slow bureaucracy … Moreover, it is hypocritical for ministers to blame the EU although they actually had a  veto in the Council…
EU summits have been coined and perceived as “battles” over national interests. But what about the “European interest”?  Many politicians do not seem to see the bigger picture… The same is true for European parliament elections: National topics are always more important than “European” topics! And the result? A negative perception of the EU,  … surprise, surprise!
• The media does not spend enough time explaining EU issues.  European politics need to play a much bigger role on national TV as well as in national newspapers and local newspapers across Europe!
• Education: Quite important but absolutely neglected! EU is practically not existent in school curricula!
Unpopularity of the EU is therefore not only a problem of the EU!
The Lisbon Treaty is a compromise based on the lowest common denominator.  And this is the problem why it is such a long document and why it is so difficult to understand.
After the failed Constitutional Treaty, the Lisbon Treaty was actually Plan B: So there will be no new treaty and issues such as “number of commissioners” and “voting weights” are not likely to be re-negotiated.

The dilemmas after the NO vote in the Irish referendum:

• If all other EU members ratify the Lisbon treaty it will be an Irish problem, if one country stops the ratification process it will be a European problem.
• The dictatorship of a minority vs. the dictatorship of a majority. If ratification continues the EU will be blamed for the latter, if ratification stops it will be blamed for the former.

I just started deleting blog spam….it is incredible what kind of spam you get these days! It used to be only the obvious things about different medications and various operations, as well as dating opportunities…but now they started making compliments:

• informative post, keep it up.
• dude cool site i like it very much.
• revolutionary. breathtaking. awesome post dude.
• Excellent forum with fantastic references and reading…. well done indeed…
• great site, nice design.
• nice choice of colors.

and my favorite:

• your blog is so important. you are the new media

That should give me indeed enough motivation to go on with my blogging

In case you just returned from your holidays in a remote area without newspapers and Internet connection, you might be interested in what happened during the summer. Here is the ultimate (but incomplete) list of important things you missed:

1. Early elections in Poland! What does this mean for the new EU treaty?

2. European Parliament elections in Romania!

3. Still no government in Belgium! Even summer was cancelled in Brussels this year.

4. The IGC is on the way, Gordon Brown needs strong nerves; and just to make sure: Britain has not lost control of its foreign policy: part 1 and part 2

5. George W. Bush lost Karl Rove and Tony Snow.

6. President Sarkozy is back!! Sarkozy in the US!! A new Iraq strategy?? A deal with Gaddafi!! Cecilia Sarkozy saves Bulgarian hostages (on her own!!)!! Hyperactive president!!

7. Georgia and the mysterious missile; Russia proposes own IMF candidate

8. Germany: Two years of Angie and Italian Mafia in Germany.

9. EU news: EU wants to break up energy giants; The EU and Kosovo

10. Media news: BBC dropped from Russia’s FM waveband; wordpress.com is blocked in Turkey! wordpress.com is still blocked…

11. George Tabori and Ingmar Bergman

In the euroblogosphere two (among many others I have not yet discovered) very interesting new blogs appeared: Brussels Comment and The European Parliament (that wants to find out what Europe has ever done for us).

Bad news for the German speaking blogosphere: The best political blog has decided to call it a day! Good bye Kosmoblog! We will miss you!

Time: June 25- 26th, 2007

Place: FloNet

Let’s have an argument!

UPDATE 1: Do we need the EU at all? – 1st round now online!

UPDATE 2: Is the EU a ‘superstate in the making’? – 2nd round now online!

It seems the EU summit produced one of these typical compromises. Most of the innovations of the constitutional treaty (which already was a suboptimal compromise) were saved. However, it is a big step forward for the EU!

But especially Polish and British demands have been included in the new compromise. The striking thing is that both countries already signed up to the constitutional treaty and watered down the provisions in the negotiations leading to the treaty. Both governments managed to flood the IGC mandate with additional footnotes, declarations and unilateral declarations….On the other side, France and The Netherlands (that actually had more reasons to demand changes…) were rather quiet.

The summit was also a diplomatic battle and a big theatrical show with late night veto threats and early morning compromises. The Kaczynski twins were in the centre of attention and managed to postpone the double majority system until 2017. However, there is the danger that the Polish strategy (non diplomatic language + lack of allies + constant veto threats) might backfire in the long run. At least the image of the Polish government is now totally ruined across Europe. Everyone already seems to wait for the next elections….

In sharp contrast to the Polish strategy, Tony Blair managed to get everything he wanted in a very diplomatic way, even though some of the ‘red lines’ were obviously designed to please the press and, of course, to enable Gordon Brown to get around a referendum!

Once again, Angela Merkel managed to achieve a diplomatic victory but for the first time she showed signs of annoyance (with Poland) and isolated Poland during the summit with the threat of calling for an IGC without Poland (this possibility was also mentioned on this blog). Ultimately, this seemed to have an impact on the twins…

To sum it up: business as usual in Brussels. Only that the result is not simple but complicated. Compared with the constitutional treaty, the reform treaty will be even harder to understand for non -lawyers. And last but not least, the debate about the constitution and the reform of the EU is finally over (at least for the next 5 years or so…).

Intergovernmental Conference (IGC)

These conferences are convened, at the initiative of a Member State or the Commission, by the Council of Ministers acting by a simple majority (after consulting the European Parliament and, if appropriate, the Commission).

So, what exactly do you want to block this week, Mr Kaczynski?

The “Blue flower” is a symbol of today’s Portugal: modernity, harmony, the oceans, transparency and openness to the future.The petals are arranged freely but concentrically, symbolising the individual contribution of each Member State to the joint endeavour of building Europe. The possibility of the symbol adopting the colours of each national flag confers on the Portuguese presidency a constructive image of openness and cooperation with every Member State of the European Union.

OK, sounds good…but does it look good? Judge for yourself:

Somehow I cannot stop thinking that this logo represents a multi-speed Europe (which might be the result of the pre-summit discussions…). The concentrically arranged petals could symbolise the different degrees of involvement in the EU: ‘core Europe’, ‘avantgarde’ call it how you like it. But (unfortunately) reality shows in this direction: The Schengen agreement, the Euro and the Prüm treaty can easily serve as examples. In the end, EU membership means something else for every member state…. Let’s hope that this is not a bad omen for the next six months and for the new ‘reform treaty’ to be negotiated later this week.

The drafting process was heavily criticised because of its rather closed and diplomatic character. The declaration will be signed during the informal EU summit in Berlin this weekend. In order to emphasise the importance of the EU institutions only the three EU presidents (Commission, Council, Parliament) are going to sign the document. One could also argue that not every member state supports wholeheartedly the declaration… But according to Spiegel online Angela Merkel managed, during a last minute telephone call, to convince the Czech government to support the document.

Declaration on the occasion of the fiftieth anniversary of the signature of the Treaties of Rome (offical version)

For centuries Europe has been an idea, holding out hope of peace and understanding. That hope has been fulfilled. European unification has made peace and prosperity possible. It has brought about a sense of community and overcome differences. Each Member State has helped to unite Europe and to strengthen democracy and the rule of law. Thanks to the yearning for freedom of the peoples of Central and Eastern Europe the unnatural division of Europe is now consigned to the past. European integration shows that we have learnt the painful lessons of a history marked by bloody conflict. Today we live together as was never possible before. We, the citizens of the European Union, have united for the better.

I.

In the European Union, we are turning our common ideals into reality: for us, the individual is paramount. His dignity is inviolable. His rights are inalienable. Women and men enjoy equal rights. We are striving for peace and freedom, for democracy and the rule of law, for mutual respect and shared responsibility, for prosperity and security, for tolerance and participation, for justice and solidarity.

We have a unique way of living and working together in the European Union. This is expressed through the democratic interaction of the Member States and the European institutions. The European Union is founded on equal rights and mutually supportive cooperation. This enables us to strike a fair balance between Member States’ interests. We preserve in the European Union the identities and diverse traditions of its Member States. We are enriched by open borders and a lively variety of languages, cultures and regions. There are many goals which we cannot achieve on our own, but only in concert. Tasks are shared between the European Union, the Member States and their regions and local authorities.

II.

We are facing major challenges which do not stop at national borders. The European Union is our response to these challenges. Only together can we continue to preserve our ideal of European society in future for the good of all European Union citizens. This European model combines economic success and social responsibility. The common market and the euro make us strong. We can thus shape the increasing interdependence of the global economy and evergrowing competition on international markets according to our values. Europe’s wealth lies in the knowledge and ability of its people; that is the key to growth, employment and social cohesion.

We will fight terrorism, organised crime and illegal immigration together. We stand up for liberties and civil rights also in the struggle against those who oppose them. Racism and xenophobia must never again be given any rein.

We are committed to the peaceful resolution of conflicts in the world and to ensuring that people do not become victims of war, terrorism and violence. The European Union wants to promote freedom and development in the world. We want to drive back poverty, hunger and disease. We want to continue to take a leading role in that fight. We intend jointly to lead the way in energy policy and climate protection and make our contribution to averting the global threat of climate change.

III.

The European Union will continue to thrive both on openness and on the will of its Member States to consolidate the Union’s internal development. The European Union will continue to promote democracy, stability and prosperity beyond its borders. With European unification a dream of earlier generations has become a reality. Our history reminds us that we must protect this for the good of future generations. For that reason we must always renew the political shape of Europe in keeping with the times. That is why today, 50 years after the signing of the Treaties of Rome, we are united in our aim of placing the European Union on a renewed common basis before the European Parliament elections in 2009.

For we know, Europe is our common future.

… it’s significant that 50 years after the EU’s march to unity began, it is now Europe, not the United States, that’s held up as a new lamp unto nations.

But now the French really exaggerated it. Following a translation mistake a while ago, it seems that Maurice Druon (a member of the Academie Francaise who was also awarded with a K.B.E!) is heading an emergency task force to save French as the universal language in the EU (which is to a certain extent English). And his arguments are really convincing:

“The Italian language is the language of song, German is good for philosophy and English for poetry, French is best at precision, it has a rigour to it. It is the safest language for legal purposes.” He argued that French should be “the authoritative” language as it is both related to Latin – in which Roman law was written – as well as the language of the Napoleonic code.

Obviously, there is quite an extensive list of songs, poetry, philosophy and literature written in all languages and it is really disgrace if such an educated man like Mr. Druon makes such a simplistic statement. Indeed, French is routed in Latin but this is also true for Spanish, Portuguese, Italian and Romanian. And besides Roman law and the Napoleonic code we have (fortunately) other legal traditions as well….

So, here is some food for thought from Michel Godet via eurotopics:

If we are not careful, participatory democracy may consecrate the triumph of self-interest in the short-term (the only unfair inequalities are those that we do not benefit from!) at the expense of long-term collective interest. The courageous decisions to be taken regarding the future are rarely consensual and if forecasting needs be participatory, the strategy that it inspires is up to the elected members of Parliament. It is up to them to demonstrate will power and courage in order to avoid participatory demagogy.

Here the link to the original article in French: Démocratie ou démagogie?

He started off calling the EU “a gigantic learning machine” that has various ‘social models’ that obviously learn from each other. The major problem of the European social model (that does not exist in this sense) is not, as commonly argued, globalisation but rather an aging society and the development of a knowledge – based – service – society. According to Giddens there are only best practices but no best models. A society is sustainable only if it manages to do structural reforms to address the challenges of the future. After two years of research he came to the conclusion that three points are essential for a country to be successful in the 21st century:

1. competitiveness has nothing to do with the promotion of low tax regimes

2. social justice and a high level of employment are also important

3. “women and children and young families first”

In the second part of the lecture he stressed the fact that the Lisbon agenda of the EU is “weak on social justice” compared with the economic efficiency/ competitiveness rhetoric. Even though many countries that have pursued policies in the Lisbon agenda style succeeded, Giddens warned that the winners from today might be tomorrows loosers because they might forget about the importance of “social justice”. But we should not think in old patterns here: “The people that are poor today are different from the people that were poor 30 years ago.” Commenting on the current state of the EU, Giddens stressed the fact that we should not be too pessimistic and that the EU is in a much better condition than people think.

All in all, nothing new. And be honest: would you buy the book?

The campaign “seeks to collect opinions and concern of the European citizens on a range of topics.” The first step was to translate this into all official EU languages.