The Great Debate UK
The spoils of EU reform
- Alain Délétroz is Vice President Europe at the International Crisis Group, www.crisisgroup.org. The opinions expressed are his own. -
There is a sumptuous feast happening in Brussels, but some are better fed than others. What to many may seem an indigestible alphabet soup of new EU institutions dealing with foreign policy after the Lisbon treaty, is actually a smorgasbord of patronage, favour and influence.
Britain may feel it has done well to get the spot at the head of the table in the form of new High Representative Catherine Ashton, but in reality the French and Germans seem to be the ones setting the menu.
Currently at issue is an organ called the Crisis Management Planning Directorate (CMPD), which is intended to be at the very heart of Ashton’s External Action Service — essentially the new European diplomatic corps.
In December 2008, the European Council agreed to merge civilian and military aspects of the planning for European peace keeping missions into a single CMPD. It was a logical step that would help the EU be more efficient in its response to conflicts.
As this new structure is now taking shape, however, the military aspect has been given vastly disproportionate weight.
Civilian experts, most notably the former director on the civilian crisis management side, have been pushed out of the decision-making structures.
from Commentaries:
A camel for EU president?
A camel, says an old Middle East joke, is a horse designed by a committee.
The European Union is in danger of getting camels for its two new leadership positions -- president of the European Council and foreign policy High Representative -- because of the dysfunctional appointment process created by the Lisbon Treaty.
The secretive horse (or camel)-trading by which EU governments choose the 27-nation bloc's top office-holders seems designed to deter strong candidates and produce lowest-common-denominator outcomes. Some of the most able potential contenders would rather stay at home than take the key jobs to Brussels.
The treaty does not provide for a democratic election because the EU is not a state, and national governments don't want a European president with his own legitimacy. However, the rules also seem to set aside the basic principles and procedures that any private sector company or public authority would use to select the best CEO or manager.
In a normal selection process, the jobs would go to the best qualified candidates with a clear vision, relevant experience and a track record of achievement, normally after a series of rigorous interviews. But the treaty suggests that the need to share the spoils among large and small states, and countries from the north, south, east and west of Europe is more important than criteria such as ability, charisma or experience.
The reason why the British people did not get a vote on the Lisbon treaty is that Tony Blair wanted the top job and knew he didn’t have a chance if Britain voted no. It will be only fair play if someone else is nominated. If the had put Blair in, it would have been a slap in the face for the British people and would have alienated us even further from the EU ( as distinct to Europe).
Thomson Reuters Newsmaker: Ireland and the Lisbon Treaty
Political leaders gathered in Dublin to debate both sides of the controversial Lisbon Treaty and the implications it could have on the future of Europe.
The panel consisted of Micheál Martin, Ireland’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Nigel Farage MEP, leader of UKIP, Mary-Lou McDonald, Deputy President of Sinn Fein and David Begg, General Secretary of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions.
Watch the debate on the player below.
It is simple – no point in spending hours of wasted time trying to sell this idea of a “treaty” – WE DO NOT by majority want the EU telling us how to run our lives and our countries! When will the politicians realise we all LOVE EUROPE but HATE THE EU. The politicians are yet again not listening to the will of the majority – what do we have to do to MAKE them listen and act upon our wishes?? WE do NOT WANT THE EU!!
Tories on collision course with EU
– Paul Taylor is a Reuters columnist. The opinions expressed are his own –
Pacta sunt servanda. For centuries international law has rested on the Latin principle that agreements must be kept.
Now Britain’s Conservative party, widely expected to win power in a general election next year, is vowing to go back on the country’s signature on European Union treaties. The Tories say voters were denied a promised referendum on the EU’s Lisbon reform treaty. Opponents of closer European integration — the Conservatives and the more radical UK Independence Party (UKIP) — won most of Britain’s seats in the European Parliament elections last month.
If implemented, the Tory policy would set a government under David Cameron on a collision course with its European partners that could harm Britain’s wider political and economic interests, which rely on EU cooperation and leverage.
The Conservatives have already taken a first step away from the centre-right mainstream by quitting the European People’s Party (EPP), the biggest group in the European legislature, and forming a caucus with nationalists and sceptics from Poland, the Czech Republic and other mostly east European countries.
Swedish Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt, a fellow centre-right leader from a moderately Eurosceptic country, lamented that step and told The Guardian newspaper Cameron will need mainstream European partners to achieve his objectives, including on climate change. He is right.
The Tories have said that if they take office before all 27 EU states ratify the Lisbon treaty, they will call a referendum on withdrawing British ratification, which was completed by parliament last year. That would put the government in the unprecedented position of campaigning against a treaty which Britain had already signed and ratified.
It wouldn’t surprise if the UK looses its respect and leadership in the EU if Cameron wins the next general elections.
Cameron has said many things solely for winning the elections; it would be very hard for him to implement most of his policies on the EU if he becomes the next prime minister.
The UK needs the EU more than they need us, especially during the financial crisis the world is experiencing. And on the other side both the German and the French are looking for a chance to isolate and minimize the role of the UK in the EU and Carmon would be the best chance they can have a go at.
We need to stay well clear of the conservatives; if we want a more prosperous United Kingdom.






I ve come across research (Wolfgang Wagner and Jovanna Bonno if I am not mistaken) about national parliamentary approval procedures for sending troops on foreign missions. On several occasions France (among other countries) had failed to comply with these procedures when contributing to ESDP military missions. This country is my N1 suspect for trying to kidnap some of the foreign policy tools in order to further its own agenda.
Stuffing the EEAS with military staff and keeping the civ-mil cells miniscule will not bring about the needed flexibility and robustness of civilian capabilities. And it is beyond any doubt that civilian tools and prevention mechanisms is what EU needs now for its foreign policy.
Right now – what can the EU do if a confict re-errupts in Nagorno Karabakh or in Republica Srpska ? nothing