Dec
9
Merkel’s Sherpas to save the European Constitution
December 9, 2006 | 6 Comments
Now it is finally out. Germany’s ambassador to the EU Wilhelm Schönfelder made public in a breakfast address this week how Merkel foresees the fixing of the European Constitution. You can find articles about it in Financial Times, Financial Times Deutschland and EUobserver.
In contrast to previous in-house plans of having Sherpa’s on the sides of all three EU institutions (with a particular view on Merkel and Barroso – who get along well), Merkel has now appointed two Sherpas only from the German government’s bureaucracy. The Commission – let alone Parliament – seem to be out of the game. Sometimes I really wonder how committed the oh-so-European governments really are towards the European institutions!
Having two people doing this job is not necessarily a bad idea as it involves a lot of travelling and talking. – However, my gut feeling is more that this is just another reflection of Germany’s incompetence in building up a streamlined EU policy. – With Mr Silberberg coming out of the CDU’s chancellory and Mr Corsepius out of the SPD’s foreign office, the classical balance of the power houses is saved – for the take of the coalition’s well-being. Great. Grand-coalition at its best.
Current plans are very ambitious with a mini-IGC to take place only during the Portugese presidency (the second half of 2007). If all goes well a slightly fixed text based on parts 1 and 2, spiced up with the institutional necessities of parts 3 (and 4) will then go down the traditional way of national ratficiation in the months to follow. By March 2009 the new Basic Treaty will get into force so as to be fully applyable to the newly elected Parliament and Commission.
Our all-knowledgebale diplomats even think to come to a text that does not need to be ratified (again) by those 18 countries that have already done so with the Constitutional Treaty because the legal substance remains the same. – I wonder however how certain French people will feel if the same product with a different name and format will be forwarded to them again – while they see that other countries do not even need another ratification. Not quite the most honest way.
My main concern however is the complete lack of understanding what went wrong in the first place – in France and the Netherlands. – A process you can even stretch down to Denmark and France over Maastricht, Ireland over Nice etc. – The underlying problem is that any intergovernmental fixing lets the people and parliamentarians aside. Secondly, why should we not have another government (or indeed people) that rejects the next proposal in 2008 on whatever nationalist or even European concern?! Why can these national diplomats simply not understand that we need to move beyond a ratification procedure that breaks with unanimity? Any polity is only supported as much as people can identify with it. Backroom-deal-Treaties are not what the Europeans are currently longing for after the wide-spread feeling of arrogance has caught them in the follow-up of recent troubles.
I still see a consultative European ballot on the day of the European elections as the only a) legitimate and b) realistic way. It will ensure a) the involvement of citizens in the process leading up to it as well as b) the chance to move on if one country or people decides not to take part in this. – And any realist has to acknowledge that this is simply a real-life threat in our European Union of 27.
Comments
6 Comments so far
I agree. A referendum is not the best way to approve a Cosntitution or a new Treaty for Europe. Did Scchuman and Monnet succeed in creating the first comunity treaty if they had summited it to a referendum? A great majority of frenech people would have not admited to cooperate with germans that were their ennemies six years ago
Wir brauchen keinen Europäischen Verfassungsvertrag, denn wir haben die Charta der Grundrechten, um das Deutsche Unrecht zurückzuschlagen.
[...] The German Chancellor has made first a resounding speech in the European Parliament last week, making her case for the revival of the European Constition and then made a strong Davos speech about globalisation. In the first, she soflty announced “consultations with the national capitals” (no quoting here, only rephrasing), while in the second emphasized the need for national politicans to convince voters of the benefits that globalisation brings. While the second is becoming mainstream “The Economist” thinking (see the editorial from the last issue here) and is of course a bit lame and full of statistics, the first one contradicts her point completely. Her stand on the way forward of the Constitution is simply: let us fix the problems and let us quickly ratify the text once and for all (see Jan’s blog entry on sherpas). And there is an interesting link with globalisation – for some of the voters in France and the Netherlands thought that the Constition was a neo-liberal project, set to put the EU on the fast-track of neo-liberal policies and thus ride globalisation with no social concerns. So, you get a rejection because of concerns on globalisation, but you end up discussing globalisation, while preventing discussing the Constitution. And of course, what can the abstract discussion on globalisation really bring new? People should discuss the Constitution instead, as a tool that equips the EU to deal with it. For Merkel, it’s better to keep this a private matter for governments. A bit of reflection from her PR team would be welcome. [...]
[...] Enfin, pas en public. Pas devant les citoyens européens. Pas dans les campagnes électorales. Même pas à dix-huit. Non, ce qu’il faut, c’est négocier le futur du traité constitutionnel derrière des portes fermées. Où rien ne filtre. Où les citoyens sont tenus dans le secret. En utilisant des méthodes surprenantes comme celle d’envoyer des sherpas. En tout les cas, c’est la vision singulière de Frank-Walter Steinmeier, le ministre des affaires étrangères de l’Allemagne qui vient de demander aux candidats à la présidentielle française rien de moins que de ne «pas faire du traité constitutionnel une affaire électorale.» [...]
[...] Germany: Reinhard Silberberg, chancellory (CDU) and Uwe Corsepius, foreign office (SPD) (s. my comments from December) EU Commission: João Vale de Almeida, Head of Cabinett Commission President Barroso and Rolf Annerberg, Head of Cabinett Commissioner Wallström [...]
Interview with Jean-Claude Juncker about the European constitution. Watch it on EUX.TV, the Europe channel, at:
http://player.narrowstep.tv/skins/0018/nsp.aspx?player=EUXTV&void=48580
Or go to http://www.eux.tv