The transatlantic ties that bind

Date: 27/06/02

IT'S been another of those weeks which make one wonder whether the EU really has that much in common with its old ally across the Atlantic.

We're frequently told that Europe and the US share the same core values, with both sides committed to the principles of freedom, democracy and the rule of law.

Indeed, every time there are signs of another transatlantic bust-up, the likes of Javier Solana, Chris Patten and Lord Robertson are queuing up to remind us about those shared values and shared heritage. Such statements, bordering on cliché, are as inevitable as night following day. Their very familiarity risks breeding contempt.

Of course we have a shared heritage, but recent experiences point to a widening culture gap, a different mindset and little in common about the way in which the two sides respond to some of the biggest issues of the day.

Compare how the EU's leaders tackled the potentially explosive topic of immigration during the Seville summit with how President Bush reacted this week to the genuinely explosive situation in the Middle East.

Faced with initial suggestions from three member states (Spain, UK and Italy) for sanctions to be imposed on countries failing to cooperate over the return of illegal immigrants, EU leaders opted for a far more measured response. While noting, somewhat fuzzily, that persistent non-cooperation could 'hamper the establishment of closer relations...with the Union,' they made it clear that any subsequent action would have no bearing on aid policy.

Instead, the European Council set out a roadmap to tackle the underlying problems: the introduction of a common identification system for visas, the speeding up of readmission agreements with countries of origin, common standards for asylum procedures by the end of next year and the phasing in of an integrated management of the EU's external borders.

It's not sexy, nor the stuff of headlines - but it is not an over-reaction or a response that could end up making things worse.

In contrast, Mr Bush's long-awaited speech on the Middle East offered not so much a roadmap as an ultimatum: dump your elected leader and then we'll support the creation of a Palestinian state.

It's diplomacy straight out of the annals of the Wild West. It makes nice headlines - but it could also make things much worse. Imagine how a Western country would react if a US President elected by less than 50 of the popular vote told its electorate to turn its back on a leader elected by 88 of his country. It doesn't exactly suggest a commitment to democratic values.

This is not to defend Yasser Arafat, a man whose many broken promises have tested the patience of almost all his allies. But Bush's speech does once again highlight the crucial differences in approach between the EU and the US.

The President's remarks did, however, provide a ray of hope for the troubled transatlantic relationship. In his vision for a future Palestinian state, Bush was careful to note that 'its borders and certain aspects of its sovereignty will be provisional until resolved as part of a final settlement in the Middle East'.

It's a caveat worthy of the EU's finest moments of fuzziness. But it's also an implied admission that the White House posse can't do everything on its own.

The sheriff of Washington will almost certainly need the help of his slow-but-sure European friends to sort out the detail.

Maybe, just maybe, those old shared values might come in handy when it matters most.

Feature on EU-US relations.