Germany and the EU
Still a sorry mess
Angela Merkel is constrained in the search for a compromise over the appointment of the next president of the EU Commission
Jun 14th 2014
BERLIN
.
WHAT a boatload of frustration Jean-Claude Juncker must have felt on June 9th. A former prime minister of Luxembourg who now hopes to become president of the European Commission, he had to watch four heads of government smiling for the cameras on a summery lake in Sweden, as they enjoyed themselves in a skiff. At the oars was Sweden’s prime minister, Fredrik Reinfeldt, the host of this mini-summit. In the boat were David Cameron of Britain, Mark Rutte of the Netherlands and Angela Merkel of Germany.
The three men in the boat are sceptical that Mr Juncker is right for the job. Mr Cameron openly opposes his candidacy as he considers him a die-hard federalist who would be unable and unwilling to reform the European Union. Mr Cameron has even hinted that if Mr Juncker becomes president he may have to move a proposed British referendum on EU membership forward from 2017.
Mr Reinfeldt, for his part, spoke for many EU countries in rejecting a parliament-led process for choosing the next president. In the run-up to the European elections on May 25th, Martin Schulz, a German Social Democrat, who was president of the European Parliament, began talking up the German custom that each party should choose a Spitzenkandidat (top candidate), and the one from the largest party should then become commission president. Mr Schulz himself was the top candidate of the Socialists and Democrats.
The German public is largely apathetic about all this. The German media and political elite, however, have accepted Mr Schulz’s logic wholesale, seeing a parliament-chosen president as somehow more democratic than a candidate chosen by the European Council (of member states’ leaders) and subsequently confirmed by the parliament. This is nonsense, argues Mr Cameron. The governments in the council are democratically elected. And the Lisbon treaty gives the council the prerogative of suggesting a candidate.
Nonetheless, says Simon McDonald, Britain’s ambassador to Germany, the German press is “killing us” with the argument that in choosing the next president it is “Britain versus democracy.” Mr Juncker unsurprisingly supports that line. As Spitzenkandidat of the centre-right European People’s Party, the largest party in Strasbourg, he now claims the mandate to become president.
As usual when EU leaders cannot agree, they are looking to Mrs Merkel to sort out the mess. The leader of the most powerful member state, however, has made a series of uncharacteristic tactical errors, which have left her in a constricted position. Her biggest mistake was to allow the German Social Democrats, who are her coalition partners, to lobby so forcefully for the idea of a Spitzenkandidat before the election that she cannot simply ignore it now. Another slip was to accept Mr Juncker as her own party-family’s choice. She has nothing against him but regards him as expendable. During the campaign, her support for him was noticeably tepid.
One constraint on her is domestic. She cannot rebuff the Social Democrats completely for fear of risking her coalition, which means that Mr Schulz must be bought off with a juicy EU role. Yet Mrs Merkel’s main limitation is her goal to keep Britain in the EU.
This is a priority, as she made clear in addressing the German parliament on June 4th. She mentioned her support for Mr Juncker in passing but then sang an impassioned paean to Britain.
Though “not an easy partner”, she said, Britain has contributed much to Europe and now shares with Germany many values and goals for the EU. She considers it “grossly negligent, unacceptable even” how “casually” some of her compatriots view a possible British exit.
To Mrs Merkel, as to the rest of her northern crew on the Swedish lake, Britain is a vital counterweight to France and the southern countries in keeping the EU liberal and pushing for freer trade, less regulation and tighter budgeting. She cannot appear to surrender to Mr Cameron’s demands. But she wants to accommodate as many of them as possible.
Realising that she has lately been off form, Ms Merkel is now resorting to trusted methods. Chief among these is to slow everything down. Thus she wants to use the next EU summit on June 26th to set the EU’s reform agenda, which should please Mr Cameron, while postponing a decision on the presidency.
Eventually, Mr Cameron could declare victory and accept Mr Juncker as irrelevant. Or Mr Juncker could bow out voluntarily. Good results “take time”, Mrs Merkel told her parliament. “We have it, and I will use it.”
WHAT a boatload of frustration Jean-Claude Juncker must have felt on June 9th. A former prime minister of Luxembourg who now hopes to become president of the European Commission, he had to watch four heads of government smiling for the cameras on a summery lake in Sweden, as they enjoyed themselves in a skiff. At the oars was Sweden’s prime minister, Fredrik Reinfeldt, the host of this mini-summit. In the boat were David Cameron of Britain, Mark Rutte of the Netherlands and Angela Merkel of Germany.
The three men in the boat are sceptical that Mr Juncker is right for the job. Mr Cameron openly opposes his candidacy as he considers him a die-hard federalist who would be unable and unwilling to reform the European Union. Mr Cameron has even hinted that if Mr Juncker becomes president he may have to move a proposed British referendum on EU membership forward from 2017.
Mr Reinfeldt, for his part, spoke for many EU countries in rejecting a parliament-led process for choosing the next president. In the run-up to the European elections on May 25th, Martin Schulz, a German Social Democrat, who was president of the European Parliament, began talking up the German custom that each party should choose a Spitzenkandidat (top candidate), and the one from the largest party should then become commission president. Mr Schulz himself was the top candidate of the Socialists and Democrats.
The German public is largely apathetic about all this. The German media and political elite, however, have accepted Mr Schulz’s logic wholesale, seeing a parliament-chosen president as somehow more democratic than a candidate chosen by the European Council (of member states’ leaders) and subsequently confirmed by the parliament. This is nonsense, argues Mr Cameron. The governments in the council are democratically elected. And the Lisbon treaty gives the council the prerogative of suggesting a candidate.
Nonetheless, says Simon McDonald, Britain’s ambassador to Germany, the German press is “killing us” with the argument that in choosing the next president it is “Britain versus democracy.” Mr Juncker unsurprisingly supports that line. As Spitzenkandidat of the centre-right European People’s Party, the largest party in Strasbourg, he now claims the mandate to become president.
As usual when EU leaders cannot agree, they are looking to Mrs Merkel to sort out the mess. The leader of the most powerful member state, however, has made a series of uncharacteristic tactical errors, which have left her in a constricted position. Her biggest mistake was to allow the German Social Democrats, who are her coalition partners, to lobby so forcefully for the idea of a Spitzenkandidat before the election that she cannot simply ignore it now. Another slip was to accept Mr Juncker as her own party-family’s choice. She has nothing against him but regards him as expendable. During the campaign, her support for him was noticeably tepid.
One constraint on her is domestic. She cannot rebuff the Social Democrats completely for fear of risking her coalition, which means that Mr Schulz must be bought off with a juicy EU role. Yet Mrs Merkel’s main limitation is her goal to keep Britain in the EU.
This is a priority, as she made clear in addressing the German parliament on June 4th. She mentioned her support for Mr Juncker in passing but then sang an impassioned paean to Britain.
Though “not an easy partner”, she said, Britain has contributed much to Europe and now shares with Germany many values and goals for the EU. She considers it “grossly negligent, unacceptable even” how “casually” some of her compatriots view a possible British exit.
To Mrs Merkel, as to the rest of her northern crew on the Swedish lake, Britain is a vital counterweight to France and the southern countries in keeping the EU liberal and pushing for freer trade, less regulation and tighter budgeting. She cannot appear to surrender to Mr Cameron’s demands. But she wants to accommodate as many of them as possible.
Realising that she has lately been off form, Ms Merkel is now resorting to trusted methods. Chief among these is to slow everything down. Thus she wants to use the next EU summit on June 26th to set the EU’s reform agenda, which should please Mr Cameron, while postponing a decision on the presidency.
Eventually, Mr Cameron could declare victory and accept Mr Juncker as irrelevant. Or Mr Juncker could bow out voluntarily. Good results “take time”, Mrs Merkel told her parliament. “We have it, and I will use it.”
0 comments:
Publicar un comentario