| Author (Person) | Davies, Eric |
|---|---|
| Publisher | ProQuest Information and Learning |
| Series Title | In Focus |
| Series Details | 17.6.01 |
| Publication Date | 16/06/2001 |
| Content Type | News, Overview, Topic Guide | In Focus |
|
The 66th European Council was held in Gothenburg on 15-16 June. The meeting was the climax of Sweden's acclaimed six-month Presidency of the European Union, but it was marred by the need to discuss Ireland's surprise 'no' to the Treaty of Nice, the United States' rejection of the Kyoto Agreement, and by the most serious rioting in Sweden's recent history - which resulted in three protesters being shot by police. Protests Gothenburg will be remembered as the first EU Summit to attract violent public protests, similar in scale and violence to those witnessed at meetings of the World Trade Organisation in Seattle (December 1999) and the G7 in Davos (January 2001). Although Swedish police had two years to prepare for the Summit (and were aware of the violence accompanying recent anti-capitalist / anti-globalisation / anti-EU protests) they are unused to managing such situations and were both ill-prepared and ill-equipped to handle the scale of the demonstrations. On Friday, police claimed they had acted to protect an injured colleague when they shot and wounded three protesters - one seriously. A spokesman said that live ammunition was used because rubber-coated bullets were not available. (Prime Minister Persson has announced a review of the policy which currently prevents Swedish police from using teargas and water cannon against demonstrators). The BBC reported that, on Saturday, Sweden temporarily withdrew from the Schengen Agreement. Aware that they were likely to be outnumbered, police and officials had tried to reduce the possibility of violence by assisting protesters and talking with them. Demonstrators were given free accommodation in Gothenburg schools, and senior politicians participated in a 'confrontational dialogue' prior to the Summit, in which Prime Minister Göran Persson - also President-in-Office of the European Council - and other members of the Swedish Government met representatives of anti-EU groups at Gothenburg University. Participants discussed a variety of issues, including global justice, EU militarisation, Economic and Monetary Union, Schengen, and asylum. Also in Gothenburg, Forum 2001 was organised - a four-day 'free speech festival' intended 'to enable ordinary people to take part in the public debate'. Sweden is not an enthusiastic member of the European Union. Along with Denmark and the UK, Sweden has not adopted the single currency, and opinion polls consistently suggest that Swedes would prefer not to be in the EU ( Eurobarometer 54 [pdf] shows that only 34&percent; of Swedes think EU membership is a good thing). Nevertheless, after Gothenburg, the Swedish media condemned not the EU but the protesters. Commenting on the protests, French President Jacques Chirac said:
Belgium takes over the EU Presidency in July, and Belgian police will have the task of ensuring security for October's informal European Council in Ghent and December's meeting in Laeken. From 2002, more European Councils will be hosted in Brussels: under the Treaty of Nice [ summary in pdf], one Summit per Presidency will be held there, and when the EU has 18 Member States, all formal European Council meetings will be held in the Belgian capital. EU leaders agreed to establish a group to examine the security of future Summit meetings. Background to the Summit As is traditional, the meeting opened with a speech by the President of the European Parliament, Nicole Fontaine, which addressed the main topics for discussion. The Swedish Presidency identified three main priorities for its six-month tenure: employment, enlargement and environment. Employment issues were discussed at the The Gothenburg Summit was therefore intended to focus primarily on environment (sustainable development) and enlargement. However, both issues had become surprisingly difficult for the Swedish Presidency to manage, following the rejection by US President George Bush of the Kyoto Protocol and the rejection by Ireland of the Treaty of Nice. The Presidency Conclusions [pdf] issued after the meeting were divided into the following sections: I. A future for Europe Attached to Conclusions were a number of annexes [pdf]: Annex I Declaration on prevention of proliferation of ballistic missiles The US and Kyoto The Kyoto Protocol on climate change was one of four main issues discussed at the 12th EU-US Summit, June 2003, held in Gothenburg on 14 June. Other issues on the agenda were the Middle East, the Western Balkans and trade. Although the Kyoto Protocol was signed under the aegis of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the EU took a major role in promoting the initiative, which took 10 years to negotiate. The United States is one of a significant number of parties which have signed the Protocol, but not yet ratified it. As of 9 May 2001, 84 parties had signed the Protocol [pdf], and 34 had ratified or acceded to it. However, as the world's most significant producer of carbon dioxide emissions, the position of the United States has been seen as crucial to the success of Kyoto. Even though the previous Clinton administration was not enthusiastic about Kyoto, the statement from President Bush that the United States was withdrawing from the Protocol produced worldwide condemnation. Not surprisingly, given the widely differing and strongly held views of the two sides, there was no agreement reached on climate change at the Summit. The EU stated that it intends to ratify the Protocol next year. The US stated that it cannot ratify an agreement which would harm its economy and which places greater demands for reducing emissions on developed countries than on developing ones. Leaders did agree to establish a High-Level Group of personal representatives on climate change. In a joint statement the two sides said:
The Irish referendum Ireland is the only Member State which requires the The result of the referendum on 7 June was a complete surprise; no-one had thought the Irish would reject the Treaty. Opposition to enlargement per se was not thought to be the reason for the 'no' vote. Opponents of the Treaty argued that Ireland would be dominated by larger Member States, would lose out financially to new Member States, and would have its traditional military neutrality compromised. Polls suggested that many voters knew little about the Treaty, with 19&percent; admitting ignorance and only 15&percent; claiming a good understanding of it. Speaking on 8 June, the President of the European Parliament, Nicole Fontaine, stated:
Meeting on 11 June, in the General Affairs Council, Ministers expressed their regret at the results of the Irish referendum. However, they excluded any re-negotiation of the Treaty and agreed that the ratification process will continue as scheduled. They 'noted that the Irish Government is deeply committed to the European Union and to the ratification of the Treaty of Nice' and 'expressed their readiness to contribute in every possible way to help the Irish Government find a way forward'. In Gothenburg, Irish Prime Minister Bertie Ahern said: 'I want to make it absolutely clear that, in my view, the 'no' vote should not be interpreted as a vote against enlargement.' (An information booklet produced by the Referendum Commission and delivered to households in Ireland was reported to have made no mention of enlargement). The present situation echoes the difficulties associated with the ratification of the 1992 Treaty on European Union (the Maastricht Treaty), which the Danes initially rejected, and then approved in a second referendum. As EU leaders have stated that the Treaty of Nice will not be renegotiated, they are presumably relying on a second Irish referendum returning a 'yes' vote. Decisions taken at Gothenburg Decisions taken by leaders at Gothenburg included:
The ratification process for the Treaty of Nice will continue so that the Union is in a position to welcome new Member States from the end of 2002. With regard to the Irish referendum, the European Council confirmed the conclusions adopted by the General Affairs Council in Luxembourg on 11 June (see 'The Irish referendum' above), and expressed its willingness to help the Irish Government find a way forward. Leaders confirmed that the enlargement process is 'irreversible' and that negotiations with those candidate countries that are ready should be completed by the end of 2002, enabling them to participate in the 2004 European Parliament elections.
The European Council welcomed the submission of the Commission's communication on sustainable development. The meeting agreed that an environmental dimension should be added to the Under the heading 'A new approach to policy making' the need for 'Getting prices right' was stressed, to enable consumers to base purchase decisions on an assessment of the true costs to society of different goods and services. The European Council also agreed on initiatives aimed at improving policy coordination both at the level of the Member States and within the Union. The European Council:
The European Council also identified four priority areas within which a number of objectives and measures were set: climate change, transport, public health and natural resources.
Under the heading 'Managing natural resources more responsibly', leaders agreed 'that the Common Agricultural Policy and its future development should, among its objectives, contribute to achieving sustainable development by increasing its emphasis on encouraging healthy, high quality products, environmentally sustainable production methods, including organic production, renewable raw materials and the protection of biodiversity'.
The Presidency Conclusions noted that: 'Last year the EU economy made considerable strides forward. Growth was high and unemployment fell to its lowest level in a decade. Since then the international economic environment has deteriorated significantly, and growth prospects in the Union have weakened. However, the large internal market coupled with the euro provides a strong and stable basis for domestic growth with less exposure to exchange rate fluctuations. The fundamentals of the European economy remain strong.' Leaders encouraged Member States to improve employment opportunities for women and for older workers. They also welcomed the Broad Economic Policy Guidelines. (Other topics mentioned included information and consultation of workers, the tax package, the telecoms package, the Single European Sky, the Community Patent, and meeting the challenges of an ageing population).
This section briefly referred to the Union's continuing efforts to create 'an area of freedom, security and justice' and confirmed that progress will be reviewed at the Laeken European Council in December.
With reference to the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP), leaders reiterated the Union's commitment 'to developing and refining its capabilities, structures and procedures in order to improve its ability to undertake the full range of conflict prevention and crisis management tasks, making use of military and civilian means.' The Belgian Presidency was invited to report on the EU's capability in time for a decision on its becoming operational to be taken at the Laeken European Council.
Referring to the EU-US Summit, the European Council confirmed that the EU and US would cooperate on the Middle East, the Western Balkans and the Korean peninsula. The European Council also confirmed that climatic change was identified by both parties as 'the most urgent environmental challenge', but disagreement over the Kyoto Protocol and its ratification were noted. The European Council welcomed US commitment not to block the Kyoto process and to work constructively at the forthcoming COP-6 meeting in Bonn. Settlement of the long-standing dispute between the EU and the US regarding bananas was welcomed. Leaders looked forward to the EU-Canada Summit on 21 June, which will mark the 25th anniversary of the EC-Canada Framework Agreement.
The Presidency Conclusions included sections (some brief) on: EU-Russia, the Northern Dimension, the Western Balkans, the Middle East, Algeria, East Timor, and the Korean peninsula. Further information within European Sources Online: European Sources Online: In Focus
European Sources Online: Topic Guides
Further information can be seen in these external links: Sweden: EU Presidency website Council of the European Union European Commission European Commission: Press and Communication Service European Commission: Delegation to the United States European Parliament
Euobserver.com Irish Times United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change United States: Department of State Eric Davies Summary of the events and progress made at the Gothenberg European Council, 15-16 June 2001. |
|
| Subject Categories | Environment, Politics and International Relations |
| Countries / Regions | Ireland |
