EU sees double over foreign affairs

Date: 14/10/1999

As Javier Solana prepares to start work as 'Mr CFSP' and External Relations Commissioner Chris Patten begins to make his mark, Simon Taylor assesses whether fears of unseemly turf wars between the Union's two foreign policy heavyweights are justified

UNLIKE Henry Kissinger, who famously remarked that he did not know who to call in the EU to discuss foreign policy issues, future American secretaries of state should have little trouble - in theory at least - in deciding whose number to dial.

Beginning next week, there will be no fewer than two heavyweights punching for the Union in international affairs. Javier Solana will take his armour-plated limousine from NATO headquarters on the outskirts of Brussels to his new office as High Representative for foreign and security policy in the heart of the city's European quarter. Less than 500 metres away across the heavy traffic of Rue de la Loi, External Relations Commissioner Chris Patten has already begun work in his office in the resplendent glass-fronted Charlemagne building.

By appointing the former NATO secretary-general and the ex-governor of Hong Kong to speak for the European Union on foreign relations, member states have underlined the EU's determination to play a role on the international stage more in line with its economic clout as the world's largest trading bloc.

But even before Solana unpacks his files, there are fears that the two men, both so used to the media spotlight, may get into an unseemly turf fight over the foreign affairs dossier.

Both have already been criticised for seeking to maintain a high profile. EU ambassadors rejected Solana's request for a fully-fitted €1-million television studio so that he could give interviews without leaving the building, while Patten had his knuckles rapped for upstaging the Finnish Foreign Minister Tarja Halonen during their visit to Moscow last week.

The Commissioner and High Representative have, however, been at great pains to stress that they have no intention of stepping on each others' toes. Patten used one of his large stock of Chinese aphorisms to describe the degree of cooperation he was aiming for, saying: "I want to work together as closely as lips and teeth."

But why, ask outsiders, does the EU need another figure to represent itself in international affairs when Patten's reputation and his contacts in US political circles would allow him to command genuine respect on the world stage?

The answer lies in the unique nature of the European Union. Although member states have agreed to abandon national vetoes and abide by decisions taken by majority voting in a whole host of areas ranging from internal market to agriculture and trade policy, foreign policy initiatives must be unanimously approved by all 15 EU governments.

The need to iron out differences between member states before taking any action makes for very slow decision-making and a system ill-suited to responding rapidly to sudden crises on the Union's doorstep.

As a result, the EU's foreign policy has often been formulated on the basis of a lowest-common-denominator approach instead of reflecting the combined diplomatic weight of 15 of the world's richest nations.

This problem has been exacerbated by the fact that the presidency of the Union changes hands every six months, so that every member state gets a spell in charge. Each country sets policy priorities for its term at the helm, but these are seldom given the same emphasis by its successor in the presidency chair.

Russia may, for example, be the number one priority for Helsinki but it will not necessarily set hearts fluttering to the same extent in Lisbon, which takes over the presidency in January next year.

As if to underline this lack of continuity, the person who has until now effectively acted as the EU's 'public face' - i.e the foreign minister of the government in charge of Union business - has also changed every six months. The troika system, under which the current presidency is assisted by its predecessor and its successor at key meetings with third countries, is designed to overcome this problem but has only been partially successful.

Reliance on this system has resulted in the EU punching below its weight in international affairs, which sparked the decision by Union leaders to create a new High Representative for Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) to bring much needed continuity to the Union's global diplomatic presence. Solana will replace the troika member from the outgoing presidency in a bid to embody EU foreign policy in a single figure.

The Amsterdam Treaty, which entered into force this year and introduced mechanisms to streamline decision-making in this area, defines Solana's role as "assisting the Council" of Ministers in foreign policy matters, helping to draw up policy and deal with foreign governments.

In practice, if Solana is to make a success of his job, this means getting EU governments to agree to bolder policy initiatives than the often worthy but bland declarations which Union governments frequently issue. As one foreign affairs official put it: "Solana's job is to agree good policies quickly."

If the EU acquires the military potential to put troops into trouble spots to protect the Union's interests, there will be an even greater need for rapid decision-making. If, for example, the EU needs to send a military force to rescue its officials from a civil war in North Africa, it will be Solana who spurs governments into taking action.

Chris Patten, on the other hand, is there to bring the range of the Union's polices to bear on external relations questions. If, for example, the Middle East peace process bears fruit and more money is needed to help the Palestinians build up their economy, it will be the European Commission and not Solana who will explore the options for providing additional funds.

To use a military metaphor, if Solana is the general taking strategic decisions, Patten is the quartermaster who ensures that all the practical arrangements have been made to allow the army to fight.

Patten and Solana, who have known each other for 15 years, have already met to discuss how they can cooperate productively and avoid damaging overlaps.

In fact, the most likely source of conflict for Solana is not his relationship with his Commission counterpart, but with the member states themselves.

Observers predict that there will be friction if the High Representative tries to push foreign ministers further than they want to go, or if his high profile detracts from a member state's achievements during its EU presidency. This could be a particular problem for small countries which see their six-month term at the helm of the Union as a chance to redress the power imbalance caused by the domination of the large member states and their interests.

The major test of member states' willingness to let Solana call the shots will come in the second half of next year when the French take over the Union presidency, and President Jacques Chirac and France's foreign minister vie with the High Representative for attention, as seems inevitable.

The potential for clashes makes some CFSP observers rather doubtful that the creation of the High Representative post will produce any kind of miraculous improvement in the EU's foreign policy performance.

"It is a move forward, but it does not fundamentally change the nature of the beast, namely that the CFSP is intergovernmental in nature. It does still come back to the extent to which major countries agree," says Dr Malcolm Chalmers, lecturer at Bradford University's department of peace studies.

Chalmers argues that the High Representative's relations with foreign ministers will therefore be key. "His success will depend on how prepared they are to defer to Solana," he maintains.

Looking on the bright side, by appointing a high-profile political figure like Solana, with the military expertise he has gathered during his term as NATO secretary-general, EU leaders have sent a strong signal to the world that they are prepared to rein in their national egotism in exchange for a higher profile in world affairs.

While Solana's bid for a television studio to ensure that his media profile remains as high as it was during the Kosovo war may appear excessive, there is no doubt that the success of his appointment - and the Union's reputation on the world stage - will depend on whether he succeeds in becoming the public face of a recognisable EU foreign policy over the next five years.

As Javier Solana prepares to start work as 'Mr CFSP' and External Relations Commissioner Chris Patten begins to make his mark, author assesses whether fears of unseemly turf wars between the Union's two foreign policy heavyweights are justified.