At the halfway house” “

Europe has to come to terms with a new energy crisis, after the question of gas supplies that had opposed Russia and Ukraine at the start of the year, affecting a large part of the Eu countries that get their gas supplies from Moscow. The institutions in Brussels are following at close hand the developments that have been involving the Italian energy company Enel and the French company Suez since last weekend. MOVES AND COUNTER-MOVES. Last Sunday the government in Paris announced a merger between Suez (which controls the Belgian Electrabel, subjected to a takeover bid by Enel) and Gaz de France (Gdf), thus creating an energy colossus, second only to Edf in Europe. The “expansionist” ambitions of Enel and the defensive counter-moves of Suez-Gdf, have once again placed the energy sector under the spotlight: it is a strongly competitive and strategic sector in a modern economy but strongly dependent, as far as Europe is concerned, on external sources. On Monday, the French Minister for the Economy, THIERRY BRETON, announced that “Gaz de France will absorb the Franco-Belgian Suez”. The French State “will remain the major shareholder in the group”, “with a share comprised between 34 and 35%”. PROTECTIONISM, NATIONAL INTERESTS. The response of the Italian Minister for Productive Activities, CLAUDIO SCAJOLA, was not slow in coming. He spoke of “neo-protectionism”. “The laws of the free market in Europe cannot be violated – he declared -. If neo-protectionism were to prevail, the political and economic destiny of the Eu would be compromised”. Scajolo’s view was shared by Italian premier SILVIO BERLUSCONI, according to whom “Europe must intervene in the affair”. The premier assigned to the Minister of Economics GIULIO TREMONTI the task of meeting the Commissioner for competition Neelie Kroes and that for the internal market Charlie McCreevy between Tuesday and Wednesday this week. “I’m not going to Brussels to engage in internal polemics – commented Tremonti -; I’m going to represent Italy’s interest”. French Prime Minister DOMINIQUE DE VILLEPIN entered the field on the opposing front. He had personally announced the merger between Suez and Gdf: “Defending the vital interests of a country doesn’t mean raising barriers. It means equipping ourselves with valid means to defend our interests and those of Europe in the best possible conditions. The prime responsibility of a government consists in guaranteeing the country’s capacities for investment, production and supply”. DIVIDED COMMISSIONERS. A similar confrontation took place, in Brussels, between the Italian and French Vice-Presidents of the Barroso Commission. “Protectionism, by whomever practised, is negative for Europe. The need to reject national forms of protectionism is now clear, otherwise the European common market would he heading for a crisis”, declared FRANCO FRATTINI, European Commissioner for justice, liberty and security within the EU Executive. He released a statement on Monday, immediately followed by one issued by his French colleague, Commissioner for transport, JACQUES BARROT. According to Barrot, the operation “seems to respect Community rules”, even if “it does not reflect the spirit of the European strategy that aims at greater energy integration”. From Berlaymont, headquarters of the Commission, the voice of JOHANNES LAITENBERGER, spokesman of the Barroso Executive, has been added: “If the GDF-Suez merger is notified, the Commission will evaluate it with the greatest determination, to establish whether it is compatible with the rules governing competition on the internal market”. As far as energy policy is concerned, however, Laitenberger declared that the EU “is favourable to a more integrated approach, because the challenges of globalization cannot be tackled with 25 small national markets”. EU MARKET AND INTEGRATION. “The Commission will intervene in the Suez-GDF merger if the operation falls within its competence and if the legal basis for intervening exists”, explained the Commissioner for energy, ANDRIS PIEBALGS. He went on to specify: “From an energy point of view, the operation is not necessarily a step backwards”. OLIVER DREWES, spokesman of the Commissioner for the internal market, McCreevy, has also intervened in the dispute: “The operation may be evaluated from the political viewpoint, as well as from that of competition and the market”. For, “if we believe in the internal market, every merger operation between companies needs to be carefully monitored to gauge its impact on competition at both the national and European level”. On the other hand, McCreevy’s spokesman explained: “Formally there is no European law that prevents a company controlled by the State from acquiring another, but that does not seem particularly correct, especially if the objective is to prevent a cross-border merger”. Other moves and counter-measures are now awaited – on the part of the companies involved, the national governments (with the risk of reprisal measures) and the Eu institutions, called to settle this conflict which certainly does not conduce to the process of European integration.