An historic mission” “

“I am convinced that enlargement is an historic mission of Europe”. MARIO MONTI , an economist of international fame, president of the Bocconi University in Milan, served as a European Commissioner for two terms, first as Commissioner in charge of the single market, financial services and tax policy (1995-99), and then as Commissioner for competition (1999-2004). He now heads two continental think tanks based in Brussels: the Bruegel (Brussels European and Global Economic Laboratory) and ECAS (European Citizen Action Service). His vision of the Europe of the future seems in some respects to be counter-tendency. He argues that single currency and enlarged frontiers are necessary prerequisites, successfully achieved, for greater continental integration. “The new accession countries have brought impetus and dynamism to the EU”, he explains to Gianni Borsa, who interviewed him for SIR and Il Segno , the monthly bulletin of the Diocese of Milan. After many advances, the EU now seems to be going through a phase of stagnation or stalemate. A “pause for reflection” has been decreed as far as the Constitution is concerned; an agreement is being sought, so far without success, on the Financial Perspectives; doubts are growing on the so-called European social model. How can the impasse be overcome? “I would say first of all that this phase of difficulty is being felt more inside than outside Europe. On the other hand, two negative phenomena are emerging inside the EU. The first is that those who are an integral part of the Community tend to see more its limitations than its advances. The second is the sheer cynicism being displayed by many politicians of various countries, who try to place the blame on Europe for the inadequacies of their own government”. Yet concrete problems are not lacking. “As far as the Financial Perspectives are concerned, it’s just as well that the contradictions have come to the surface. It’s a crisis which will be overcome, I believe in the space of a few months, and which will at the same time force the 25 to reflect on Community policies, on the resources to be invested, and hence on the EU’s priorities, thus taking their eyes off the rear-view mirror”. Are you referring to the exorbitant funds allocated to agriculture? “Of course. The question of the Constitutional Treaty, on the other hand, is more complex, and the false step in this direction is grave. In this case, a solution of the crisis will inevitably be long drawn out”. The detractors of integration point during this phase to various “original sins” of the Union: first and foremost, its alleged “democratic deficit”. “The conviction I have formed is that politics are in crisis in Europe in general more than at the level of the European Union itself. The growing disaffection of electors to the ballot box, and the popular vote that ever more often gives the thumbs down to the government in office, should, I believe, be interpreted in this sense. That also goes for the referenda on the Constitution held in France and Holland: I don’t think that the citizens of these countries prevalently expressed themselves on the content of the Constitution. They expressed themselves, instead, on the actions of their governments or on the feared ‘danger of Turkey’ and what it might represent. I insist in saying that national governments are shifting responsibility for their failures abroad: whether on Brussels, or on Chinese or Indian competition… And, besides, if we look more closely at the matter, it’s not even true that the EU institutions are so undemocratic. I share the idea, however, that this Union, if it is to forge closer relations with the citizens of Europe, must achieve concrete results”. What do you mean? “It must respond to its great original objectives, pursued in the course of its history (the objective of peace in primis) and is called to allay the daily fears of citizens: employment, security and health. But a necessary prerequisite for this is that it should ‘slim down’ in its functions”. With enlargement is there not a risk of watering down the identity and roots of Europe? “I would draw a distinction. The national identities, which need to be preserved and fostered, are quite compatible with, and complementary to, the European identity. As far as the roots are concerned, my view is that it would have been better to recognise them in the Constitution, but I consider the content more important than the form. And I think that the EU, with its Treaties and its policies, has in fact affirmed some fundamental values. For many European countries, indeed, the impulse to recognise and promote the centrality of the person, solidarity between the generations, equality between the sexes, the protection of civil liberties and social rights, and the defence of the environment, has come precisely from the European Union”.