|
|
|---|
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Europe has decided who will staff the two most powerful positions to come out of the Lisbon Treaty: Belgian PM Herman van Rompuy is the first permanent President of the European Council, and the EU Trade Commissioner, Britain's Baroness Catherine Ashton, is the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security.
A few brief thoughts:
-As expected, the centre-right got the presidency while the centre-left filled the high representative position. I always found this bargain a bit odd, seeing that the centre-right is far more popular (based upon the last elections), and the high representative is judged by most to be the more powerful/globally significant position.
-van Rompuy's position on Turkey (anti-EU accession) no doubt endeared him to both Merkel and Sarkozy, whose consensus all but guaranteed his appointment. Consider Turkish accession dead for now. Also, his reputation as a consensus builder fits the technocratic preference Europe has long held for its bureaucrats.
-The low international profile of both candidates has disappointed many and furthered concerns that the new EU positions will fail to 'stop traffic' in Washington or Beijing. But I suspect this was a calculation of both Merkel and Sarkozy. Neither wanted a European head with more clout or name-recognition than they (this undoubtedly played a role in Tony Blair's failed candidacy for the presidency). van Rompuy's press conference remarks surely pleased France and Germany when he said he would remain 'discreet', as he had 'throughout his political career.'
-Baroness Ashton's notable lack of international experience makes her a curious choice. In the post-meeting press conference, she said she would put forth a 'quite diplomacy.' I would argue Europe needs a more robust global presence.
-It will be perhaps a year before we can fully understand the significance and power of the new positions, but it seems certain that national leaders (Sarkozy, Merkel, Brown/Cameron) will continue to wield the most power in Europe and drive its agenda, both home and abroad.
A few brief thoughts:
-As expected, the centre-right got the presidency while the centre-left filled the high representative position. I always found this bargain a bit odd, seeing that the centre-right is far more popular (based upon the last elections), and the high representative is judged by most to be the more powerful/globally significant position.
-van Rompuy's position on Turkey (anti-EU accession) no doubt endeared him to both Merkel and Sarkozy, whose consensus all but guaranteed his appointment. Consider Turkish accession dead for now. Also, his reputation as a consensus builder fits the technocratic preference Europe has long held for its bureaucrats.
-The low international profile of both candidates has disappointed many and furthered concerns that the new EU positions will fail to 'stop traffic' in Washington or Beijing. But I suspect this was a calculation of both Merkel and Sarkozy. Neither wanted a European head with more clout or name-recognition than they (this undoubtedly played a role in Tony Blair's failed candidacy for the presidency). van Rompuy's press conference remarks surely pleased France and Germany when he said he would remain 'discreet', as he had 'throughout his political career.'
-Baroness Ashton's notable lack of international experience makes her a curious choice. In the post-meeting press conference, she said she would put forth a 'quite diplomacy.' I would argue Europe needs a more robust global presence.
-It will be perhaps a year before we can fully understand the significance and power of the new positions, but it seems certain that national leaders (Sarkozy, Merkel, Brown/Cameron) will continue to wield the most power in Europe and drive its agenda, both home and abroad.
Labels: Europe, international affairs
