Monthly Archives: October 2009

As Tony Blair’s chances of becoming the European Union’s first full-time president fade, so the chances go up that David Miliband will be the EU’s next foreign policy supremo.  This is the picture emerging on the second day of the EU summit in Brussels.

The killer blow to Blair’s prospects was delivered by Angela Merkel, Germany’s chancellor, who let it be known that she would prefer the EU’s first permanent president to come from one of the EU’s smaller states.  By definition, this rules out Blair.

German officials say she has nothing against Blair personally.  But in this matter Merkel’s voice is perhaps the most important among all the 27 leaders present.  Germany is not putting forward a candidate either for the presidency or for the foreign policy post.  It is, however, the EU’s biggest country and its paymaster.  Merkel is therefore the honest broker, the swing vote, the kingmaker – however you want to put it.

Meanwhile, Blair has lost the support of José Sócrates, Portugal’s prime minister, and of José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, Spain’s prime minister.  Both are socialists and both think Europe’s centre-left should focus not on getting the presidency but the foreign policy job.

That is why the summit chatter about Miliband is getting ever more excited.  Looking around Europe, one does not see too many foreign policy stars on the centre-left side of the political firmament.  And check out this editorial in Thursday’s Le Monde on Miliband.  It describes him as “the young and brilliant foreign secretary” and praises his commitment to the EU, contrasting it with the views of William Hague, the Tory shadow foreign secretary, whom it accuses of “an almost pathological europhobia”.

With Le Monde on your side, how can you lose?

As European Union leaders gather for their two-day summit in Brussels, the word is that the British government’s effort to have Tony Blair selected as the EU’s first full-time president is running into trouble.

Prime Minister Gordon Brown has just finished a round of afternoon discussions with other European socialist leaders, trying to persuade them that Blair deserves the job.  The talks did not go well.

Martin Schulz, chairman of the European Parliament’s socialist group, made it plain that he and many other Continental socialists didn’t want the EU presidency to go to a Briton.  The reason?  The UK is semi-detached from Europe, not in the euro area, not in the Schengen zone permitting border-free travel around the EU, etc, etc.

Moreover, the socialists think they have a better chance of getting in one of their own people as the EU’s next foreign policy high representative than as the first full-time president.  With 20 or so of the EU’s 27 governments controlled by the centre-right, they reason, national leaders are bound to pick someone from their own political family for the EU presidency.

Of course, you could argue that some centre-right leaders – Italy’s Silvio Berlusconi comes to mind – are perfectly happy to see Blair in the job.

But maybe not in France and Germany.  French President Nicolas Sarkozy and German Chancellor Angel Merkel met for dinner in Paris on Wednesday night, and word is reaching reporters in Brussels that the two leaders were lukewarm about Blair’s candidacy.  If true, that would come close to polishing him off – or, rather, it would enable him to say he had never been a candidate in the first place.

The fuss over who will be the European Union’s first full-time president is obscuring the less sexy but potentially more important question of who will get the two or three most powerful jobs in the next European Commission.  A good many governments would prefer to see one of their nationals in a truly influential economic policymaking role in the Commission than occupying the EU presidency, which may turn out to be a more hollow job than once foreseen.

Commission president José Manuel Barroso says he will not nominate his new team until EU leaders have chosen their new head of foreign policy, a post that entitles its holder to a Commission seat.  Any country wanting a big economic portfolio at the Commission will therefore steer clear of putting forward a candidacy for the foreign policy job, because there is only one Commission seat for each nation.

Does this explain why the German government has proposed Günther Oettinger, prime minister of the state of Baden-Württemberg, as its next commissioner?  He doesn’t have obvious foreign policy credentials, so  the German idea is almost certainly to slot him into a top economic job.

Three portfolios in the outgoing Commission - competition commissioner, internal market commissioner and trade commissioner – stand out from the rest, because they bestow real power on their occupants.  They are the policy areas where Europe is most effective at speaking with one voice and exerting worldwide influence.  It would make sense for Germany, which was disappointed by the performance of its outgoing representative, Günter Verheugen, as industry commissioner, to want one of these jobs.

If the internal market portfolio is rejigged, perhaps in order to put a stronger focus on Europe’s response to the financial crisis, it is easy to imagine a scramble among the bigger EU countries to be put in charge of financial regulation.  France is said to be keen on getting something meaty like this (Michel Barnier, or perhaps Christine Lagarde?).  Of course, this would rule out the foreign policy position for a Frenchman – but Paris, better than most national capitals, knows which jobs in Brussels contain the beef and which the onions.

What about the UK?  The intriguing point here is that it would be extremely simple for Prime Minister Gordon Brown to quash the rumours that David Miliband, his foreign secretary, is manoeuvring to be the EU’s next foreign policy supremo.  All Brown would need to do is to announce that Catherine Ashton, the British EU trade commissioner, was being renominated to Barroso’s team.  Or Brown could name someone else.  Either way, it would instantly rule out Miliband as the head of EU foreign policy.

But Brown hasn’t done that.   It is anyone’s guess why.  But one explanation is that, with Tony Blair’s undeclared EU presidential bid far from certain of success, Brown needs other cards to play.  If Blair is the British government’s queen of hearts, Miliband is, you might say, the knave of spades.

Champion of a strong voice for Europe (George Parker and James Blitz, FT)

EU leaders to exchange picks for the presidency (Tony Barber, FT)

The EU is no presidency… (Timothy Garton Ash, Guardian Comment is Free)

All rise for president What’s-his-name (Wall Street Journal)

Klaus says he ‘will sign’ the Lisbon treaty (Andrew Gardner, European Voice)


With a mere 27 members (all European heads of state or government, admittedly), the electorate that will pick the European Union’s first full-time president and new foreign policy high representative is even smaller than the conclave of Roman Catholic cardinals that chooses a new pope.  But this isn’t stopping other European busybodies from trying to muscle in on the decision.

Take the main political groups in the European Parliament, for example.  They have no formal say in the matter whatsoever.  Nonetheless, the parliament’s socialist group appears confident that it has an informal understanding with the centre-right European People’s Party that the full-time EU presidency should go to a EPP politician and the foreign policy post should go to a socialist.

Well, I’m glad that’s all clear, then.  Perhaps Gordon Brown, Angela Merkel, Nicolas Sarkozy and the 24 other EU leaders who will actually make the choices shouldn’t bother to show up for tomorrow’s summit in Brussels – or for a follow-up summit in November, when the decisions are likely to be taken.

Still, for what it’s worth, here is the shortlist of six candidates that the socialists are proposing for the EU foreign policy job, currently held by Javier Solana of Spain:

a) Frank-Walter Steinmeier, Germany’s outgoing foreign minister, who suffered a crushing defeat in last month’s German elections at the hands of Chancellor Angela Merkel;

b) David Miliband, the UK’s foreign secretary, who says he isn’t available for the job, not least because his government wants Tony Blair to be the EU’s first president;

c) Miguel Ángel Moratinos, Spain’s foreign minister since 2004, and a former EU special representative for the Middle East peace process;

d) Elisabeth Guigou, a member of the French parliament who served as France’s EU affairs minister from 1990 to 1993;

e) Alfred Gusenbauer, who was chancellor of Austria for less than two years in 2007-2008 before his term ended, in the words of the German news magazine Der Spiegel, “in fiasco amid infighting, tactical errors and his own over-estimation of himself”;

f) Adrian Severin, a former Romanian foreign minister who, as previously noted in this blog, is the winner of a mysterious “Man of the 20th Century Award”.

There are many reasons why the socialist list is not to to be taken seriously.  I shall mention just two.  First, the German government has already named its next member of the European Commission as Günther Oettinger, prime minister of the state of Baden-Württemberg.  Because the EU foreign policy chief will automatically be a Commission member, and because each country is entitled to only one Commission seat, it is impossible for Steinmeier to get the foreign policy job.

Secondly, why would a man who has been Man of the 20th Century stoop so low as to take on the menial task of running European foreign policy?

There can be few presidential campaigns that have kicked off with the declaration “I am not a dwarf”.  But this is what Le Monde quotes Jean-Claude Juncker today as saying in the interview in which Luxembourg’s prime minister reveals he would consider being a candidate for the European Union’s presidency “if the call came”.

I have interviewed Juncker and seen him in action more than a few times over the years, and I can confirm that he is not a dwarf – though I have heard other disparaging terms applied to him that need not concern us here.  What most interests me is the enormous gulf in perceptions of Juncker’s potential candidacy between the UK and certain mainland European countries.

In UK government circles, Juncker is seen as a non-starter for two reasons.  First, the president’s job will be to represent the EU on the world stage, especially – according to one view - when sudden crises flare up, such as the August 2008 war between Russia and Georgia.  During that conflict, President Nicolas Sarkozy of France represented the EU as the holder of the bloc’s rotating presidency, and even he – one of the EU’s true big hitters – found his negotiations with the Russians extremely tough going.  Juncker, as the leader of the EU’s 26th biggest country (population 500,000 out of a EU total of 500m), would in the British view just not be taken seriously enough as the EU’s voice in such a crisis.

Secondly, Luxembourg represents a country with a profound commitment to deep European integration, something that is anathema to the British.  It is the same objection that caused the UK to reject the candidacy of Guy Verhoftstadt, the former Belgian premier, for the European Commission presidency in 2004.

On the Continent, especially in some of the EU’s western European member-states and in certain smaller countries, Juncker is seen as an entirely credible candidate.  Members of the German Bundestag and foreign policy establishment admire him, though it is open to question whether that view is shared by Chancellor Angela Merkel.  In the end, she is the only person in Berlin whose opinion matters, since she will make Germany’s choice.

As was pointed out by Le Monde‘s interviewer, Juncker appears to have fallen in Sarkozy’s estimation over the past year because of the Luxembourger’s alleged inability to rise to the occasion when the global financial crisis struck Europe.  Accurate or not, this observation prompted a smooth reply from Juncker on Sarkozy’s brilliance as the EU’s president from July to December 2008: ”Europe has never been led with such perspicacity as under the French presidency.”

I feel pretty sure that such compliments won’t ever make Sarkozy support Juncker as the EU’s first full-time president, since the French head of state’s own six months in charge of the EU gave a good idea of the kind of dynamic leadership that he thinks Europe needs.

But that probably won’t upset Juncker, since he is a canny politician whose instincts surely told him long ago that he would never get the job and that the most he could hope for would be to sabotage Tony Blair’s candidacy.

Hopes on Czech approval of the Lisbon Treaty (Tony Barber, FT)

EU needs big hitter, says Miliband (George Parker, FT)

Huge fraud afoot in EU sugar market (Stephen Castle & Doreen Carvajal, IHT)

Mrs Merkel wins, Germany Loses (Wall Street Journal)

David Miliband makes friends in Luxembourg (Charlemagne blog, The Economist)

There is something fishy about the race to fill two of the biggest jobs going in Europe – the first long-term presidency of the European Union, and the post of EU foreign policy chief.  The closer the EU gets to decision time, the more various unofficial candidates are ruling themselves out or running into difficulties.  As far as concerns the presidency, the latest person to say she doesn’t want to be considered for the job is Mary Robinson, the former Irish head of state.

In some ways, it’s a shame.  The politically independent Robinson commands much respect across Europe and beyond – more than certain candidates I could mention from Belgium and Luxembourg.  It would also be a clever move on the part of the EU’s 27 leaders to put a woman in the presidency and so boost the EU’s profile in the eyes of its citizens.

Still, Robinson has done the right thing.  In truth, she didn’t really have much choice.  The point about the future EU president is that he or she must be someone whom the other leaders around the table recognise as one of their own kind.  In other words, he or she must be by instinct a full-blooded politician and by career profile a sitting or a former head of government.  Outsiders such as Robinson would find it much harder to control a meeting of 27 national leaders or to broker the necessary deals among the big players.

So who will it be?  All I would say at this stage is: “Beware of anyone who claims to have inside knowledge.”  Of course, there have already been some fairly spirited exchanges – one of the most extraordinary being the warning by William Hague, the UK Conservative party’s shadow foreign secretary, to other EU countries that the appointment of Tony Blair, the Labour ex-premier, would be regarded by a future Tory government as an unfriendly act.

But all the contacts among governments have so far remained informal.  While Germany was conducting its coalition negotiations on forming a new government, everything was totally up in the air, because Chancellor Angela Merkel could not commit herself to a particular candidate.  This gave President Nicolas Sarkozy of France some wiggle room to imply that his support for Blair might not quite be of the 100 per cent variety.

Now that the German coalition talks have reached a successful conclusion, we will probably see more momentum in the discussions over the two new jobs.  But one vital point is still undecided – does the EU want a dynamic, high-profile president or a less visible but bureaucratically efficient figure?  At the moment, the balance of opinion among the 27 countries appears to favour the second type.  But an awful lot will depend on which way Merkel and Sarkozy go.

A single-market celebration (Charlemagne, The Economist)

ECB warns Brussels on hedge-fund rules (Ralph Atkins and Nikki Tait, FT)

In saving jobs, mixed efforts in EU (Yasmine Ryan, New York Times)

Brussels blog

Notes from the EU

About this blog Blog guide
This blog covers everything from the European Union's foreign and economic policies to the fortunes of its political leaders - as well as the more light-hearted aspects of life in Europe.


To comment, please register for free with FT.com and read our policy on submitting comments.

All posts are published in UK time.

Contact the Brussels blog team: Peter Spiegel, Joshua Chaffin, Alex Barker and Stanley Pignal.

See the full list of FT blogs.

The Brussels blog authors

Peter Spiegel is the FT's Brussels bureau chief. He returned to the FT in August 2010 after spending five years covering foreign policy and national security issues from Washington for the Wall Street Journal and the Los Angeles Times, focusing on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. He first joined the FT in 1999 covering business regulation and corporate crime in its Washington bureau, before spending four years covering military affairs and the defence industry in London and Washington.

Joshua Chaffin is one of the FT's EU correspondents, covering areas including policies on trade, the environment and energy. He has worked in the FT's Brussels bureau since late 2008 and before that was an FT correspondent in New York and Washington DC.

Alex Barker is EU correspondent, covering the single market, financial regulation and competition. He was formerly an FT political correspondent in the UK and joined the FT in 2005.

FT blog: The World

Across the globe: Gideon Rachman and his FT colleagues debate international affairs on The World blog.

In the news

Archive

« Sep Nov »October 2009
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031