Events, dear boy, events …

By Ilana Bet-El

Date: 19/01/06

The unpredictability of politics was probably best described by the late British prime minister Harold Macmillan as the sudden appearance of "Events, dear boy, events". As even the first few weeks of 2006 have shown, the EU has entered a period of sudden international "events"; the question is whether it can rise to dealing with them.

The EU spends a lot of time navel- gazing, which is a reason for its difficulty in focusing on external affairs. This trend has reached a peak with the failed constitution referenda and budget disputes of 2005. So inward bound and narrow was the focus of the Union that it became barely discernible to its own citizens, let alone to anyone beyond its borders. But that is a tendency that can no longer be afforded.

The EU decided upon the course of the common foreign and security policy (CFSP) and the European security and defence policy (ESDP) out of necessity as much as ambition: the Balkan wars of the 1990s not only reflected the political weakness of the economically vibrant Union, but also the limitations of national resources and influence. No individual EU state could resolve any of the crises, or even intervene independently to achieve a decisive outcome. The lesson was therefore two-fold: that the EU carried more political weight when operating internationally as a whole and that the international efforts of each state carried far greater significance when they were part of the whole rather than when separate.

Since the Balkan wars, the EU has cherry-picked in its involvement with international events: an EU force in Bosnia, a lightning and successful intervention in the Congo, a dismal dabbling in Darfur, an absence from Iraq, support for NATO in Afghanistan. Each of these was accompanied by necessary but increasingly repetitive debate, soul- searching and hand-wringing about principles and formulations both within the institutions and between them and the member states - which established a process, but was often out of all proportion to what was actually at stake. For in truth, apart from the actual precedent of creating an EU force, especially in Bosnia, it could be argued that none of the above events were of a strategic interest to the EU, or its member states.

This has now changed. In quick succession energy security, bird flu and Iranian nuclear aspirations manifested themselves in the first days of the year. Each reflects upon a different sphere, but all have much in common: they are international "events" which affect each member state separately and the Union as a whole. It is rapidly becoming clear that the abilities of a single member state in dealing with each of these can only gain significance, or possibly even relevance, if made as part of the whole. Equally, the relevance of the EU in dealing with these events can only be evident when it is clearly representing all member states.

It can be argued that bird flu has nothing to do with foreign policy, or that security of supply is a matter of energy rather than security. That is precisely the deep pit into which the EU must not fall: all three are long-term strategic issues which affect all member states and the Union as a whole in their ability to function daily - and to preserve its citizens' way of life. They affect Europe's security.

It is necessary for the member states to empower the EU to act decisively to the benefit of all.

This is not the time for another round of the usual soul-searching and hand-wringing. Events have intervened and they must be dealt with. If this happens, there is a chance that the CFSP and ESDP will move on from principles and formulations to hard facts. That is the wonder of events, dear boy.

Commentary feature in which the author suggests that the emergence of long-term strategic issues at the beginning of 2006, which affected all Member States and the Union as a whole, showed the need for Member States to empower the EU to act decisively to the benefit of all. Author quotes the examples of energy security, bird flu and Iranian nuclear aspirations.

• Primary Source