Keeping expectations low
Wednesday 15 July 2009By EU Reporter Correspondents
After a tumultuous first half of the year under the internationally unruly and domestically strife-ridden Czechs, European hopes are high that order will be restored as Sweden, country with a reputation of being stable and transparent consensus builders, takes over at the helm of the EU. But Stockholm has so far delivered more hopes and wishes than promises, knowing that the bloc’s unresolved institutional woes threaten to overwhelm the political agenda for the six-month stretch.
Sweden took over the reins of the EU presidency on 1 July, announcing that it would not focus on pending institutional hurdles, but on burning political issues such as a response to the global recession, and ensuring an international deal on climate change.
"Now is not the time to look inwards and look at institutional questions. Now is the time to show leadership," in particular ahead of a global summit on reducing greenhouse gasses in December in Copenhagen, and for that "we need clarity," Swedish Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt told reporters in Stockholm.
But clarity will surely be lacking at least until after the second vote in Ireland on the Lisbon treaty, and the Nordic country’s top diplomats might end up wasting valuable time at the negotiation tables discussing the union’s constitutional problems, rather than taking the world lead on reducing greenhouse gasses or tackling the financial crisis.
Ireland is set to hold a new referendum in early October. Even if opinion polls suggest the "yes" side will win, if those predictions are wrong, Europe would be plunged into a new crisis- for the Swedes to clear.
“The official answer is that there is no plan B," foreign minister Carl Bildt said about the outcome of the Irish vote.
"The real answer is even worse. There really is no plan B," he continued.
On the other hand, if the Lisbon treaty comes into force at the end of the year, it creates two big new European jobs: a European president and a foreign policy chief. Stockholm will then have to oversee the nominations - and possible nasty horse-trading between member states- for the new positions.
"Trying to manage all those positions that Lisbon brings in is going to be a big test of Swedish political skills," Mark Rhinard, a senior researcher on European politics at the Swedish Institute of International Affairs, told AP.
Political hot air
With a looming standstill in the EU legislative machinery, ahead of the great inauguration ceremony in Sweden's capital last Wednesday, Stockholm hurried to try to lower expectations on achieving the presidency’s main goals.
Speaking about the post-Kyoto agreement on greenhouse gas emissions, expected to be concluded in December, Swedish Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt said, in an interview with Swedish daily Svenska Dagbladet that the environment was a “hotter” topic among world leaders before the financial crisis occurred.
The PM said the Kyoto-agreement was an agreement between a coalition of ‘willing states’, something which did not seem to be the case with some of the partners this time around.
The December Copenhagen summit might turn into a starting point rather than an end, creating more political hot air than real, binding agreements, some experts concluded.
Summarizing the Swedish presidency’s statements on its plans, the attentive listener and reader can see through a clever and well-known pr-strategy: to humbly and realistically admit that problems lie ahead, and not promise too much and, above all, to not repeat the mistakes of previous presidencies.
The Franco-Czech experience
As Stockholm takes over the EU gavel, a downhearted Czech Republic makes an ignominious exit from the EU spotlight, after a presidency term that has been described as the worst in the history of the EU.
Whether Prague really did such a lousy job is debatable: in all fairness, few could have predicted the latest war in the Middle-East, a prolonged and intensified financial crisis or a gas crisis with Russia during the coldest months of the year, let alone a French president who refuses to leave the bloc’s speakers podium.
But Prague planners flunked hopelessly at their pr-stunts, leaving the international image of the first former communist country to lead the bloc severely damaged.
For Sweden, an important lesson has been drawn from the Czech experience, as well as from the previous French presidency: despite meticulous planning and clearly-defined goals, the leader of the EU may well have to deal with completely different issues, crises that take over the political agenda and tests the presidency’s ability to improvise.
A year ago, France had set out to profile its presidency term with reviving the old dream of a “Mediterranean Union”, a soon forgotten, stillborn idea. But instead, the French presidency ended up completely dominated by the war in Georgia, which broke loose just as Paris took over the EU lead in summer.
Similarly, the Czech Republic had planned a grand initiative for the Middle-East, which would lead Israelis and Palestinians closer to reconciliation. Come the war in Gaza in winter, and Czech plans were outplayed.
The legacy of the Swedish presidency will be measured against how it tackles two key issues: climate and the financial crisis. Better then, to tone down expectations on these two goals, while keeping an unusually low profile on the world’s conflict spots.
If expectations are low enough at the start, in the future, any tiny step forward can be presented as a positive surprise.
Besides, even the weakest presidency can claim certain achievement and agreements, as some of the EU decision-making machinery grinds automatically, regardless of which country holds the rotating leadership.
FROM THE JULY 2009 PRINT EDITION