BRITAIN effectively put the final nail on the coffin of the EU Constitution yesterday when Foreign Secretary Jack Straw announced the government would postpone a referendum on the battered treaty.
The high-profile rejections of the treaty by France and the Netherlands, two of the six founding members of the EU, rocked the boat. Britain’s public loss of faith in the treaty just days before the next EU summit was tantamount to a funeral invite.
The official line from the European Commission is that 10 countries have already ratified the treaty, counting for 51 per cent of the EU population, so it’s business as usual for the remaining member states who should go ahead and ratify the treaty.
Analysts argue that EU leaders have four main options as to what to do next: carry on ratification, try to renegotiate the treaty, cherry pick the bits they want, or bury it. The real decisions will be taken at the next EU summit on June 16 and 17.
The Cyprus Mail caught up with EU ambassador in Cyprus Adriaan van der Meer, a Dutchman himself, to hear how the Commission sees all this. Not surprisingly, in a positive light.
“We see it as a healthy development that in some of the older member states, there was an intensive debate on EU affairs. In my country, Holland, there was a wide range of people involved in the debate, and we had a high turn out, 62 per cent, compared to the euro elections where less than 40 per cent voted. It’s a healthy development,” said Van der Meer.
Asked how far the debate in both countries centred around the constitution or on internal politics, he said: “It is clear that in France, there was more of an element of national policies, hence the government reshuffle afterwards. In Holland, there was more of an element of EU policies.”
He went on to explain that his countrymen feared the constitution would intervene in Dutch liberal policies. “It’s also a clear expression that the pace of integration is too fast, specifically enlargement, as well as showing dissatisfaction with government pressure to vote yes.”
Whatever the reasons, one thing is for sure, EU leaders and institutions will have to rethink its communications strategy and make a special effort to bring citizens on board the eurotrain.
“It’s a clear wake up call to EU and its leaders. There seems to be a gap and divide between the leadership and citizens. We have not been able to communicate the advantages of the constitution and European integration.”
However, it is not the end of the road for the EU bloc, as Van der Meer is at pains to highlight. “Europe is functioning, all the institutions are functioning.”
Asked if the EU was unable to monitor the pulse of its people like national governments can, Van der Meer said: “In Brussels, we have extensive consultative committees, civil societies are represented in consumer affairs and agricultural affairs, there is extensive NGO representation.”
The Commission is already working on a new communications strategy and has instructed its representations in all member states to get closer to the people and find out what they want from the EU.
The outcome of the last two referenda has also sent out a message to national leaders. They have a responsibility to explain the benefits of EU integration. “There is a growing sense that this is not only the task of EU institutions. We want to co-ordinate strategies with member states.”
Meanwhile, the competences of the EU will have to be re-examined, to make sure that the helping, unifying hand of the EU is always needed and wanted.
“We have to be careful what we are doing now, whether there is a clear added value in doing something at a supranational level, if there is a common good involved,” he said.
Will the burial of the constitution lead to a two-speed Europe where eager countries continue rapid integration ahead of the more reluctant?
“Enhanced co-operation between small groups is possible but the idea is for peace and prosperity all over the EU. Two ‘no’ votes should not be over-dramatised. We will come up with good solutions on June 16-17. In such circumstances, the EU is at its strongest.”
Regarding future enlargement, Van der Meer was clear: as long as Bulgaria, Romania and Turkey stick to their commitments, then the Commission will stick to its side of the bargain.
For Turkey, this means signing the customs protocol and putting judicial reform in place before accession negotiations start. The latter has already been achieved with the adoption of the penal code while the signing of the protocol is due shortly.
The actual expansion of the Parliament, Council and Commission to accommodate Bulgaria and Romania is foreseen in the Treaty of Nice. Turkey’s entry was covered in the Constitution, but if that goes, new provisions will have to be made to accommodate Turkey if and when it joins.
However, last week’s ‘no’ by the French and Dutch voters was seen as concern of the EU’s rapid expansion into unknown territories, specifically, towards a predominantly Muslim nation at the eastern most points of the continent. If leaders continue to feel public pressure, Turkey can expect a rough ride during accession negotiations.
The framework for negotiations will be published sometime this summer.
Negotiations will likely be based on a “benchmark approach” whereby no chapter can be closed until a degree of compliance is seen. This is seen as one way of satisfying the concerns of the public.
However, as is commonly heard by the EU, there is no Plan B. The Commission is looking at fully-fledged membership for Turkey, not some sort of partnership deal as whispered by some member states.
A lot will be revealed this summer.
