Globalaffairs

Issue 17/ October-November 2009
By Niruban Balachandran

On the 2nd of October, the majority of the citizens of the Republic of Ireland voted “Yes” on the Treaty of Lisbon in a nationwide referendum, enabling the 27-nation European Union (EU) to play a more powerful role in international affairs. The Treaty’s creation of a full-time EU presidential post, a foreign policy chief and a diplomatic service will, for the first time in the EU’s history, allow for a singular representative on the global stage that will stand for a unified foreign policy for all 27 nations in the bloc.

The Treaty of Lisbon is intended to upgrade Brussels’ functioning by streamlining its decision-making and voting systems, since the previous system was an outdated throwback to the time when the EU consisted of only 15 nations. The Treaty will also replace the rotating-presidency system with a full-time 2 ½ year term presidency, empowering the EU Parliament with a broader legislative space of multiple new policy areas (including asylum issues and criminal justice), enacting the 2000 Charter of Fundamental Rights as legally binding for the first time, and finally, creating the equivalent of the EU’s own foreign minister and diplomatic service. (1)

After “Yes”

The previous version of the Treaty was rejected by Irish voters in June 2008, with 53.4% voting “No” against the Treaty and 46.6% voting “Yes” in favor of it. (2) On 2nd October, Irish voters reversed their verdict, this time with 67% voting “Yes” and 33% voting “No.” (3) Analysts consider the change in heart to be largely a result of Irish worries about the economic crisis, as well as the collective desire to be perceived as a committed member of the EU. (4) Poland ratified the Treaty shortly afterwards, leaving the Czech Republic as the remaining EU member state left to give it the final green light.

At this point, what will the “Yes” on the Lisbon Treaty mean for Brussels? In theory it would empower the EU’s parliamentary machinery and hyper-simplify its decision-making procedures. It would strengthen the EU’s international role and enhance its ability to project itself as a singular global power. It would make the EU the first group of nations on the planet to base its constitution on the concept of universal human rights. Finally, the presidency’s extended term length would allow each incoming president more time for executive continuity and relationship-building, both at home in Europe and around the globe.

Critics claim that the Treaty’s implementation will eventually lead to each individual member state’s loss of sovereignty over time. (5) Some Euroskeptics envision a nightmarish scenario where national governments’ independent roles and influence will be one day handed over to an ultra-federalist “super-state” that wields authoritarian, top-down control over the internal affairs of each member state. Besides pointing out the glaringly obvious slippery-slope fallacy as well as the projected logistical challenges of pulling off such a bureaucratic feat, the most reasonable response to this, of course, is that there exists no evidence in the Treaty’s text or elsewhere that such a scenario will even come close to actually occurring.

Superpower or Safe Player?

Now that the Treaty has been ratified by Ireland, the lobbying, negotiating and vying for the post of first President of the European Union has already begun in earnest. The first president will be the new “face of Europe,” representing the EU at the United Nations and in summits with world leaders. The presidency is a semi-permanent post (the term length is 2 ½ years) which replaces the current 6-month rotating system.

These days, the most talked-about individual candidate for EU President is arguably former British Prime Minister Tony Blair. Supporters of Blair contend that he would most likely hit the ground running in several policy areas, that he would bring Britain closer to the Brussels, and that his strong relationships with recently-reelected EU Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso and other EU leaders would likely facilitate consensus-building from the outset. Critics of Blair, however, seriously question his foreign-policy judgment in light of his much-derided decision to participate in the Iraq war. They also point out Blair’s previous record of Euroskeptical remarks and worry that he would favor the Big Three (viz. Britain, France and Germany) at the expense of the interests of smaller EU member states. (6)

Others possible presidential candidates include Former Taoiseach of Ireland Bertie Ahern, Prime Minister of Luxembourg Jean-Claude Juncker, former Austrian Chancellor Wolfgang Schussel, Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt, Dutch Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende, Former Prime Minister of Denmark and NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen, former Spanish Prime Minister Felipe Gonzalez and former Finnish Prime Minister Paavo Lipponen. (7)

At this point, who will be appointed to the presidency is anyone’s guess. One thing is almost certain, however: the personality of the person who gets the post will send a clear message to the rest of the world about the EU’s foreign-policy aspirations. A larger-than-life, opinionated and prominent figure like Tony Blair will symbolically herald a future role for the EU as an ambitious global superpower on par with the United States. In contrast, someone who harbors the exact opposite characteristics will probably demonstrate that the EU will be taking a safer, less controversial bet in setting the stage for the bloc’s future foreign policy.

Into the World

At a time when human rights are under attack in many countries around the world, a gradual economic recovery is underway, international peace-building is made more difficult by the twin threats of ethnopolitical conflict and terrorism, emerging markets are transforming the economic landscape entirely and state terror is increasingly employed by governments to cement their power through violence, the EU’s unique and indispensable approach to leadership, diplomacy and policymaking is needed more than ever.

With the ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon, there are three predicted benefits for the EU’s ability to move forward as a global power: First, it would strengthen the EU’s foreign policy role and influence through a single foreign-policy apparatus, akin to a United States of Europe. The Treaty’s creation of a single foreign affairs chief and diplomatic corps will further help accomplish this. It would also grant the leader of this post the right to propose defense or security missions, although the Treaty retains individual member states’ veto powers over joint EU-wide foreign policy and security decisions. (8) Second, in terms of influence, it would reinforce the EU model for peace-building in the world, and (at least symbolically) vindicate its legitimacy. The EU’s distinctive “third way” of diplomacy, conflict prevention, humanitarian relief, reconstruction efforts and development aid — rather than armed conflicts or isolationism — is a commendable model for the rest of the world in terms of some of the best practices in international relations.

Lastly, ratification of the Lisbon Treaty will probably renew the EU’s sense of optimism and shared resolve - something needed in today’s turbulent times.

With respect to conflict management, the EU has led by example for the last several decades in showing the world that it is possible for interstate wars to be rendered virtually inconceivable. This has been accomplished by knitting nations together through a blend of commercial trade, freedom of cross-border mobility and political cooperation. In light of The Bastiat Principle — “When goods do not cross borders, armies will” – the creation of a single European market and the lowering of intra-EU trade barriers has played a significant part in reducing the risk of armed conflicts between member countries over the last several decades. As Barroso himself recently wrote before his re-election as Commission President, “The European Union has had almost 60 years as a laboratory for cross-border supranational co-operation, making it a natural champion of global governance.” (9)

The Treaty of Lisbon also includes a formidable collective-defense agreement similar to Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, the latter of which declares that an armed attack on any NATO member state shall be considered to be an attack on all. (10) Although the Treaty of Lisbon also requires all member states’ militaries to aid and assist other members experiencing an armed conflict, a new protocol in the amended Treaty allows the Republic of Ireland and other militarily-neutral countries to opt out if necessary. (11)

The Indispensable Role of the EU in the World

Although this does not mean that ratification of the Treaty will be a “magic bullet” that will lay waste to all of the Brussels’ institutional weaknesses or quell all Euroskeptics’ concerns, to be European in the world now represents the kind of globally-conscious, respectful and earnest diplomacy that is sorely needed in 21st-century geopolitics today. To America, an empowered EU with stronger international clout is exactly the sort of seasoned, stalwart ally that both would need to further their shared interests around the globe. To be fair, however, this might either improve or weaken the transatlantic relationship over the long term - either outcome seems possible.

In Iain Macwhirter’s pithy analysis of the EU, he wrote, “Europe has succeeded in creating the highest standard of living in history and combined it with social responsibility, democracy and security from war. Europe is liberal, rational, secular and tolerant. There is nowhere like it on the planet, and never has been.” (12)

In other words, the EU is not just an economic bloc, but a set of ideas. Those ideas will be tested and re-tested in the years to come, now that the Irish have voted “Yes”.

The ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon will grant the EU a more substantial international role, as well as a unified foreign-policy apparatus, organizing structures and a stronger platform from which it can launch large-scale foreign policy initiatives, social programs and diplomatic envoys. Best of all, it would multiply the EU’s ability to champion universal human rights around the world and lead by example in terms of best practices in humanitarian and security missions.

If the EU is seen as having been a positive force on the global stage in the years to come, it will have the Irish to thank.

Niruban Balachandran
Executive Director of TeamBuilders International Ltd.

References:

1 www.europa.eu/lisbon_treaty/glance/index_en.htm
2 www.referendum.ie/current/index.asp?ballotid=78
3 www.referendum.ie/referendum/current/index.asp?ballotid=79
4 www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/…/1224255886295.html
5 www.voteno.ie/html/ten_reasons_to_vote_no.htm
6 www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2009/10/09/european_idol
7 www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2009/10/09/european_idol
8 www.economist.com/world/europe/displaystory.cfm?story_id=14585996
9 www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/6180958/What-is-this-place-called-Europe.html
10 www.nato.int/docu/basictxt/treaty.htm
11 www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2009/0930/1224255524370.html
12 http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4156/is_20050529/ai_n14647693/pg_3

The views and opinions of contributors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of Global Affairs