Common foreign policy is still possible after Iraq, say analysts

Date: 20/03/03

By David Cronin

THE beleaguered EU and United Nations were described this week as "heavy casualties of war without a single shot yet being fired" by Robin Cook, as he announced his resignation as leader of the UK's House of Commons.

So, will hopes of the Union developing a genuine common foreign policy be buried under the rubble of buildings in Baghdad and Basra in the coming days and weeks?

Analysts of EU affairs believe that, despite the gulf that has existed between the Franco-German alliance on one side and the Anglo-Spanish one on the other, a cohesive policy can still emerge if the war is followed by a period of soul-searching.

Michael Emerson, senior research fellow at the Centre for European Policy Studies, contends that one way to avoid such fissures in future would be for the EU to have a seat in the UN Security Council. This could be done if the two current EU countries who are permanent members of the council, Britain and France, agreed to "pool" their seat and hand it over to the Union.

Labelling such a move as "institutional surgery first class", he said this would prevent a repeat of recent events in which British premier Tony Blair sided with Washington before discussing the matter with EU counterparts.

"It's extremely important that we have institutional discipline among the EU, that they [member states] should negotiate among themselves first on what their position should be.

"The big mistake on Blair's part was that he should go shooting off on his Iraq venture, without coming to the EU and saying 'let us discuss our policy'."

Fraser Cameron, director of studies at the European Policy Centre, says the "Union has moved on from crisis situations in the past and there's no reason why it won't do that again".

He feels that once the war is over, the EU should examine whether the flexibility or 'enhanced cooperation' clauses in the Amsterdam and Nice treaties could be used.

The Convention on Europe's future, for example, is examining proposals to allow states eager to move forward on defence and armaments cooperation to do so in 'core groups', leaving the others to join later if they wish.

"This should be explored," he adds. "Whether or not it will take off depends on the war in Iraq - as with so many other things."

However, the suggestion gets a lukewarm response from Piotr Nowina-Konopka, vice-rector of the College of Europe in Warsaw. Efforts to circumvent the need to find consensus on certain foreign policy matters could have adverse consequences for the Union after it takes in ten or more new members, he fears.

"We might be condemned to follow a two-speed Europe," he warned.

"When confronted with today's challenge, the European Union ceases to exist. Nowadays the cleavage is temporary but we must confront ourselves with the long-term challenge. There's no other way around this."

This latter view was shared by Javier Solana, the EU high representative for foreign affairs, ahead of the General Affairs Council meeting in Brussels on 18 March. He said it was vital "in these difficult moments" for European countries to "come with the determination to work together for peace, to work together for meeting the different positions on the EU and to do it in a constructive manner, in such a way that the foreign and security policy of the EU is not a casualty of this crisis".

Clearly, for Robin Cook, that message has not been heeded.

Analysts of EU affairs believe that, despite the gulf that has existed between the Franco-German alliance on one side and the Anglo-Spanish one on the other, a cohesive policy can still emerge after the war.