Post Laeken - Pre Christmas

The Malta Independent

Post-Laeken ` Pre-Christmas

The EU summit concluded last weekend at Laeken under the Belgian presidency has been described as a leap of faith for the EU.

The present EU members have irreversibly decided that enlargement is politically essential and already overdue and that it is to happen in a big bang including 10 countries of the 12 applicants ( excluding Bulgaria and Romania who need more preparation time) sometime in 2004.

Enlargement is expected to deliver stability and prosperity to eastern and southern Europe, and underpin democracy and the rule of law in these oft heretofore turbulent regions.

But this cannot succeed unless the EU institutions remain efficient and are perceived as legitimate. European integration makes democratic control of the EU institutions ever more necessary. The challenge for the Convention to be held next year and the Inter-Governmental Conference (ICG) scheduled for 2004 will be how to succeed in rationalising and simplifying the EU structures without losing the capacity to accommodate the separate identities and guard the jealous sovereignty of the member states.

This is almost trying to square the circle. As the EU enlarges,` democratic decision-making will be indispensable to preserve efficiency and yet this democratic process in itself challenges the preservation of sovereignty of the individual states, especially the smaller ones like Malta.

Against this background one can assess how risky the present government`s TINA (there is no alternative) approach to EU membership is. What if the circle is not squared What if next year`s conference and the ICG of 2004 produce an EU structure which gives preference to the democratic values in the decision making mechanism of the enlarged EU over the preservation of sovereignty of individual states, especially the smaller ones Are we to carry on regardless or should we hold our breadth, give priority in the allocation of resources to addressing structural inherent domestic economic problems, and then decide as to our future relationship with the EU on an informed basis when the shape of the future yet to come is known and defined`

Beyond mottos, logos and rhetoric this is the main distinction between our two main political schools regarding their EU policy.` It is not that the PN is in favour of the EU and the MLP is against it. It is that that the PN approach` EU membership project as an act of faith to be achieved at any price including loss of sovereignty. The MLP is a more wait and see, not for the foreseeable future,` without closing all doors to future evolution of such policy into full membership if circumstances change sufficiently to make the policy change in Malta`s best interest.

Much will depend as to what comes out from the Giscard d`Estang Convention and the subsequent ICG. Nothing is taboo is the brief given to the convention. If the result is a more flexible Europe moving away from the one size fits all model` adding value to the nation states without excessive regulation and interference,` than Labour Swiss policy could become congruent with membership. If on the other hand post-2004 EU emerges as a rigid one size fits all centrally controlled organisation,` it would be in our interest to preserve our flexibility and differentiation values by staying out whilst maintaining the best possible relationship.`

Rather than divide ourselves over the EU we should unite is forging true solutions for our serious economic problems which we have to solve for ourselves without waiting for big daddy to do it for us. We can get more serious about the EU after 2004 when we would know what sort of EU are we talking about.

Pre-Christmas, whilst wishing my readers a very peaceful Christmas I pray that progress in finding a true solution for the Palestinian problem by the general acceptance of the emerging statehood for PLO is not destroyed by extremists of Hamas and Sharon who do not impress anyone that they are seriously searching a solution for peace.