A President for Europe?

A President of Europe could speak for a huge powerhouse and should be taken seriously by the emerging powers (China, India, Brazil, even Indonesia), he concluded. Blair. Also, this revolutionary step would require serious efforts complemented by five key areas for Europe’s status in the global hierarchy of power: a reformed tax system and a new social model, completing the single market, developing a common energy policy, one defense policy and a single policy on immigration and organized crime. ”He believes – The Times newspaper said – that international society should not hear a strong voice in the European flag and that this could be achieved through the election of a president of Europe.This newspaper is skeptical about the opposite goal and advanced modality for achieving it. ”

It is not just famous British conservatism? I think not. Rather, it is the chance of success of the proposal put forward by former British prime minister. In reality, it proposes a president with a mandate to lower the EU Council – governing body composed of the Heads of State and Government of member countries – but higher than the current High Representative for Common Foreign and Security.

As one who daily live in the midst of these realities, I can say here should be on, if we want to know how feasible is the proposal of Mr Tony Blair. Council would provide a lower term, say, the acceptability of the idea, since heads of state of member countries will not disappear simply by choosing the president of Europe and will not even see the powers undermined.

On the other hand, a European voice in foreign affairs and security is stronger than that of the High Representative is required today, many times, at least in European Palamentul statements and actions of the High Representative – Baroness Ashton – were criticized for lack of courage and delay. But I do not have to be Pharisees, because we agreed that this function to choose a birocat, precisely because they do not undermine the Council’s authority. Or, the criticism today is not brave enough, it seems unfair. It is true that the Lisbon Treaty gives these bureaucrats the power to initiate and propose policies and courses of action the Council, Baroness Ashton thing apparently made little, but I doubt that they were eagerly appropriated by the Board so “jealous” of his powers …

But to return to the main issue, namely the authority of a president directly elected by European citizens. Sure, direct election brings a much higher authority than one nomination (current president of the Council – not Europe – Mr. Van Rompuy was appointed to this office for a term of two and a half years, with possibility of longer receive another one), but such an authority may not translate directly into the eyes of our foreign interlocutors, unless he can show them that Europe meets its commitments with respect, it follows that, in general, do what he say to do. 

Or, as long as the power of the office or home will be lower than that of the Council, as proposed dl. Blair, this will not happen! The result? International authority, which is the main motivation of the establishment of such functions will be illusory, at best case. Not to vobim the fact that, internally, ie within the Union, as long as all countries will rise through the Council, advanced by Mr five objectives. Blair will have to wait quite some time since the same causes (differing national interests of members) which today are made relatively “on ice.”

Sure, you could argue that, based on the fact that it is directly elected by European citizens, the president may try to impose an acceleration of achieving those objectives, but this would put him on a direct collision course Council, which will result in the best case, an increase of paralysis of the whole system, that is exactly the condition we want to overcome by establishing the office of President of Europe