Europe’s leaders are getting radical. On Thursday the presidents, prime ministers and chancellors of the European Union will meet for a day of economic policy discussions in Brussels – but not in their normal location, the marble-and-glass Council of Ministers building, famous for its charmless, disinfected atmosphere and its 24km of headache-inducing corridors. No, this time they will get together in a nearby building called the Bibliothèque Solvay, which is a pleasant old library rented out for dinners and receptions.
The switch of location was the brainwave of Herman Van Rompuy, the EU’s first full-time president, who thought it would encourage a more creative, informal exchange of views. He has introduced another innovation: each leader is to be restricted to just one adviser at the talks. This isn’t a problem for countries with leaders who are masters of economic policy detail. But others are less happy about the arrangement. It is whispered that the Italians are swallowing especially hard, wondering what on earth Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi will say once he’s on his own.
The discussions are supposed to focus on a new EU plan, dubbed the 2020 strategy, which is all about boosting Europe’s economic growth and protecting its social model over the next 10 years. Europe’s approach to international climate change negotiations is also likely to crop up, as is the question of aid to earthquake-hit Haiti. It’s an informal summit, so at the moment there are no plans for a communiqué.
All well and good. But as you can tell, there’s one thing missing – something so big that it’s almost surreal not to see it on the agenda. This is the fact that European monetary union is at present undergoing the most severe test of its 11-year history. There is turmoil in the debt markets, and investors are increasingly doubtful that Greece can emerge from its fiscal crisis without emergency external help. Contagion is spreading to Portugal and Spain. It may spread further still.
Yet in public the German and French governments rule out assistance for Greece. As a result, no one can put their hand on their heart and say they know what the EU will do if matters get worse. Indeed, no one even knows which EU authorities and which decision-making mechanisms would come into play. It is amazingly irresponsible and it is making the markets extremely jumpy.
At a moment of such high tension, it would almost defy belief if the EU’s leaders met for a day of talks and said nothing about the Greek crisis and its associated risks. If they emerge from the summit and give an ambiguous message to the media and markets about what their plan of action is, it would be worse than if they hadn’t met in the first place. If they come out and start jabbering about unnamed sinister forces trying to sabotage the euro, that would be terrible, too.
What is needed is a crystal-clear statement explaining how the EU – and the eurozone in particular – will handle this emergency. The trouble is, I have a horrible feeling that too many EU leaders just don’t get it.
Across the globe: Gideon Rachman and his FT colleagues debate international affairs on