Milestone on the road from Rome

Date: 20/03/1997

BIRTHDAYS can be awkward events, especially if the individual at the centre of attention is no longer in the first flush of youth.

Anniversaries are inevitably seen as a time to take stock, to consider past achievements and to set new targets. Fortieth birthday celebrations in particular are notorious milestones for bringing on bouts of self-assessment as people ponder whether their best days are behind them or still lie ahead.

Institutions are no different and EU politicians will indulge in a similar exercise in introspection later

this month as they temporarily decamp to Rome to commemorate two treaties signed in the Italian capital on 25 March 1957.

But the emphasis will be clearly on the future rather than the past during the morning, as foreign ministers consider the way ahead for the Union and the prospect of further enlargement once the current Intergovernmental Conference negotiations on EU reform are over.

The time for reminiscing will come later in the day when, in a series of events lasting six hours, the assembled dignitaries will mark the 40th anniversary of the twin treaties which established the European Economic Community and the European Atomic Energy Community.

Considerably greater effort is going into the exercise than was invested in the treaties' 25th birthday party in 1982. Then, the low-key silver jubilee celebrations occurred in the middle of an acrimonious budgetary row between the UK and its partners. They were limited to a gala lunch, a few radio interviews with European Commissioners, sundry speeches, the distribution of pamphlets and a message on Vatican Radio.

On this occasion, despite the cynicism which the Union evokes in many quarters these days, the 12-starred European flag will be waved with considerably more vigour and many of the great and good are beating a path to Rome's door for the celebrations.

The European People's Party held a commemorative meeting in the Italian capital earlier this month and various pro-Union organisations such as the European Movement are hosting a series of events either side of the historic date.

One of the most prestigious is a three-day conference in memory of the late Emile Noël, the Commission's secretary-general for 30 years. Organised by the Commission and the Conseil Universitaire Européen pour l'Action Jean Monnet, it will bring together scores of dignitaries including past and present prime ministers, foreign ministers, Commissioners and others involved in shaping the EU.

The event divides the past 40 years into four key eras: the 1960s, during which the Rome treaties were implemented; the progress and recurrent crises of the period between 1970 and 1984; the relaunch and single market years of 1984 to 1990; and the post-Maastricht era.

As the pendulum has swung between unquestioning enthusiasm and stagnant cynicism, the history of the Union could also be charted through the successive enlargements which have transformed it from a six-member to a 15-nation club and more than doubled its population to 370 million.

The EU's development from infancy to maturity has been marked by a succession of other treaties, all of which are now safely deposited in the archives of the Italian foreign ministry.

With the sole exception of the Treaty of Paris, which established the European Coal and Steel Community in 1952, the original version of every item of primary Union legislation - whether it was signed in Brussels, Luxembourg or Maastricht - has been taken by car under armed guard from the Belgian capital and placed in Rome.

For the Union's critics, this gradual expansion of the EU's powers and competencies is a long way from what was originally intended. They maintain that the venture was meant to amount to no more than the abolition of internal tariffs and the creation of a single market.

But there is strong evidence to suggest that many of the founding fathers believed that, in the long run,

the Union edifice would be considerably more elaborate.

One of the French treaty drafters, Pierre Uri, argued that the free play of market forces was not sufficient on its own to provide full employment, welfare, security and prosperity.

As the former head of the Commission delegation to the US, Sir Roy Denman, pointed out in his recent book Missed Chances, Uri envisaged merging member states' economic systems and the transfer of responsibility over private enterprise and development planning to a wider European Community. “This, in the long run, implied and was meant to imply, fiscal, social, monetary, and ultimately, political union,” noted Denman.

Whether the Union ever eventually reaches such an ambitious destination remains to be seen. Meanwhile, the arguments between supporters and critics over the degree of desirable integration will continue to rage.

But in one very crucial sense, the current debate is being conducted on totally different terms to that of four decades ago. Then, EU initiatives were handled very much as a 'conspiracy of élites'. The running was made by a small group of key politicians and their leaders. The general public was neither involved nor consulted.

Such tactics may have been necessary at the time. But they are inappropriate in an age when key constitutional issues require public approval in referenda in a number of countries and when the explosion of media outlets turns the spotlight on every twist and turn of EU business.

Now the emphasis is more on information and consultation, although even the Union's supporters would agree more still needs to be done in this direction.

A second major difference is that subjects once considered taboo in EU circles are now very much part of the Union agenda. Largely as a result of the Maastricht Treaty, issues such as defence, security, organised crime, drugs and extradition no longer send officials and diplomats scuttling for cover.

But alongside this expansion of responsibilities has, somewhat paradoxically, come a certain lack of confidence.

In 1957, the six founding members had a clear goal: to merge their economies and ensure that war between them was a thing of the past. They also had a clear enemy: Communism and the Soviet bloc. The collapse of Communism and success in eradicating the spectre of war in western Europe have undermined that earlier certainty. The public takes peace and the ability to move freely between countries for granted.

It is no longer swayed by those earlier arguments and, if anything, contrasts them with the Union's inability to do anything about the violence on its borders, whether it be in Albania or the former Yugoslavia.

As yet, no clear replacement motivation has emerged. Ambitious goals are still on the table, notably that of a single currency and ending geographical divisions in Europe by enlarging to the East, but their very enormity makes them almost unreal for many.

During the 30th anniversary celebrations in Rome ten years ago, the then European Commission President Jacques Delors predicted: “When we come to celebrate the 50th anniversary of European construction, the Single European Act will be seen as particularly important.”

For him, that act was the engine which made the single market possible and pulled the Union out of the stagnation and family quarrels, particularly over money, which dogged it between 1979 and 1984.

Few would place the Maastricht Treaty on a similar pedestal, despite its major achievement of sketching out the road towards a single currency.

As they draw lessons from the past and gaze into the future next week, EU leaders face a double challenge.

They must find a message which will convince the public of the relevance of the Union's activities, and they must fashion a revised treaty which will pave the way for the EU's enlargement and be worthy of the same accolade as the Single European Act at the Union's 50th anniversary celebrations in ten years' time.