The European Council on Foreign Relations

The foreign-policy solidarity gap

By Nicu Popescu - 29 May 09

This piece was first published as part of the author's EUObserver blog.

Complaints about an imbalance in the levels of EU engagement in the Southern neighbourhood compared to the Eastern neighbourhood are wide-spread. The new EU member states like to point to the  fact that EU funding for the Mediterranean neighbours is much bigger than for the Eastern neighbours; and EU diplomatic engagement in the Middle Eastern conflicts (be it the Israeli-Palestine conflict or Lebanon) has been much less shy than in the post-Soviet space.

But Southern EU member states also have their grudges. The Portuguese prime-minister implied once that the EU has spent almost twenty years cajoling and baby-sitting the Eastern neighbours of the day (beginning with Central Europe which is already in the EU, and then the Balkans), and now it is time to turn to the South where a "new" generation of threats such as terrorism, migration and conflicts are threatening Europe.

Two recent EU summits with their neighbours provide a good snapshot of the balance of priorities and the foreign policy solidarity gap: the July 2008 summit of the Union of Mediterranean in Paris and the May 2009 summit of the Eastern Partnership in Prague. Stanislav Secrieru, a blogger, contrasts the attendance of the two summits by EU leaders. The full lists of attendees are here: for the Eastern Partnership summit and for the Euro-Mediterranean summit.

Take summit attendance as a proxy that can reveal a certain solidarity gap in the way EU member states support each other's foreign policy priorities. The question is which of the new EU member states attended to the Euro-med summit in 2008, and which of the Southern EU states paid back in kind by attending the Eastern Partnership summit in Prague in 2009?

Here is the crude data. The Euro-med summit in Paris in July 2008 was attended by 25 heads of state - presidents or prime ministers. Finland sent both its president and prime-minister. Only the Czech Republic was represented by a deputy-prime-minister and Belgium by the foreign minister. The important thing is that virtually all of the new EU member states showed solidarity on this occasion with the Mediterranean priorities of the rest of the Union.

The Eastern Partnership summit provides a strikingly different picture. Ten EU member states were not represented at "heads of state level": Sarkozy, Zapatero, Berlusconi, and Gordon Brown ignored the summit. The leaders of Austria, Luxembourg, Malta and Portugal as well. Stranger, though, was the fact that Lithuania sent its foreign-minister, and that Romania's president Traian Basescu also stayed away. Strangely enough the Swedish foreign minister Carl Bildt, one of the "parents" of the Eastern partnership, also stayed away (though Sweden was present at PM level). But the fact that Italy was represented by its minister of welfare, while Austria by its ambassador (perm.rep) to the EU - was outright offensive. I also hear German diplomats were furious at the lack of diplomatic solidarity of so many EU member states (Merkel was in Prague).

The bottom line: on the issue of pressing the reset button of EU policy towards its neighbours - South and East - the new EU member states showed more solidarity with their fellow (older) EU member states than vice-versa. The attendance lists of the two summits are proof of that.


Comments

There are no comments for this entry yet. Get the discussion started and post below.

Submit a Comment

Your message will be submitted to a moderator before appearing online. Name and email address are required, all other fields are optional. Your email will not be displayed.

Please enter the word you see in the image below:

Remember my personal information

Latest Publications

A danger or an opportunity? Post-Copenhagen China and climate change

This latest edition of “China Analysis” looks at the response to the Copenhagen conference within China itself, as it faces the worst environment position imaginable, threatening its systems and interests. 

A global China policy

China is now a huge foreign policy challenge to the EU: it must respond with a global China policy.

Beyond wait-and-see: the way forward for EU Balkan policy

Risk of instability in the Western Balkans: the EU can no longer 'wait-and-see'.

Dealing with Yanukovych’s Ukraine

The Yanukovych Paradox: How Ukraine’s new president can be good news for Europe after all.

China shapes its post-crisis economic agenda

The latest issue of China Analysis looks at Beijing’s willingness to strengthen international economic governance, and its authors argue that much thinking in China seems to focus on the short term

China and India: rivals always, partners sometimes

The authors of the latest issue of China Analysis argue that Western concerns over “Chindia” - the emergence of a Sino-Indian economic power bloc or strategic alliance - may be unwarranted. 

Towards a post-American Europe: A Power Audit of EU-US Relations by Nick Witney & Jeremy Shapiro

Europe has the US president it wished for, but does Barack Obama have the strong transatlantic partner he wants?

Can the EU rebuild failing states? A review of Europe’s civilian capacities.

Have broken promises and treating Afghanistan, DR Congo and Iraq like Bosnia left the EU without the capacity to prevent fragile states from becoming failing states?

What does Russia think?

ECFR publishes a collection of views from key Russian intellectuals.

The EU and human rights at the UN: 2009 annual review

The EU’s ongoing loss of influence at the UN is putting lives at risk, argues the author of ECFR’s latest paper.

In the Press

The Age - 07 Sep 10

Thomas Klau on France's pension protests.

TIME - 06 Sep 10

Jose Ignacio Torreblanca on the significance of ETA's call for a cease-fire.

Les Echos - 01 Sep 10

Thomas Klau on Germany’s linchpin role in the eurozone governance debate.

Read more press >

Click here for ECFR's Youtube channel.

Global Calendar