Healing the rift” “

Europe’s absence in the Iraqi conflict, the uncertainty about the role of the Union in the reconstruction of Iraq and the re-establishment of fruitful relations with the USA. We discussed these questions with Kostas Grammatikakis, journalist and president of the European Association of Editors of the Regional and Local Press . In the Iraqi conflict European foreign policy showed all its divergences. Do you share the criticism that the conclusions adopted by the recent Athens Summit were ‘uncourageous’? “Unfortunately, it’s true, even though it was difficult to act otherwise. Just a few hours previously the Council had forced Giscard d’Estaing – who however was expecting as much – to downgrade the role and functions of the planned Foreign Minister of the Union. The divergences of view of the Fifteen, when it’s a case of acting in the international field, at the political level, with one voice alone, have been and still remain too many. With the enlarged Union the confusion will be even greater. It’s a paradox, but if the Convention fails to ‘perform the miracle’ and give Governments the courage to adopt joint decisions on foreign policy issues, the economic strength of the Union will obscure its capacity to act unilaterally in the international field at the political level. I am nonetheless convinced that realism will prevail: European history teaches us that, faced by a crossroads, albeit with difficulty, and sometimes bitter contrasts and changes of mind, Brussels has almost always chosen the right road”. Could the EU Foreign Minister be an interlocutor for the USA? “If we read the draft articles on the Institutions of the Union, we can grasp that the idea is to ensure that it’s the President of European Council, and not the Minister of Foreign Affairs, who should represent the EU on the world scene. Yet either way, it makes little difference. There are two main factors that determine European credibility in foreign policy, especially in relations with the superpower USA: the clear definition of the future European institutional architecture, as I’ve already said, and the willingness of Governments to surrender some degree of national sovereignty. But it’s a question not only of willingness, but also of effective possibility: foreign ministries and diplomacy are consolidated, somewhat bureaucratic structures, with international contacts and ties, both at the level of protocol and personal relations, defined in time, and each very jealous of their own prerogatives. Even the relations between the Ministries and chanceries of the same member state are often difficult. I believe that during an initial period an EU Foreign Minister could be a good coordinator, especially in matters of foreign trade and major principles, but that policy in the field – which is for the most part business politics – will continue to be made by the capitals. Before the end of the decade, however, the Union will either equip itself with a genuine foreign policy or have to resign itself to vassalage to the USA and its allies”. Reconstructing Iraq: can the triangle EU-USA-UNO smashed by the war be put together again? “The Americans have assumed administrative control of the country: it could hardly have been otherwise considering they ‘did everything themselves’. A lot will depend on how willing the administration in Washington will be to involving the Union (and not just the UK) in the contracts to rebuild Iraq’s infrastructures. That’s as far as ‘bricks and mortar’ reconstruction is concerned. But there’s also another side of the coin: in the democratic reconstruction of the country, only the EU and the UNO can play a serious and effective role. Let’s say so loudly and clearly and we’ll be heard”.