When “one voice”?

It’s an old story. The new European Union has new faces and habits, new rules and objectives, and new policies and structures in all sectors and directions, sometimes anticipated and other times with risky delays. And maybe this is the way things should go, for the good and for the bad, since at the end of the day it’s all about “politics”. However, an exception in Community development is causing serious concerns, which cannot be overlooked. It consists in Brussels’ inability to speak with one voice when it comes to world peace and development issues. This “vulnus” ought to be examined at the roots, since such polyglotism stems from the inability to reach an agreement. Most likely, it is also stems from the proclivity of EU-27 governments – or most of them – to give priority to national economic interests over European action and thought, to the detriment of the victims of the lack of peace and development – millions if not even billions of people -.This state of affairs is exemplified in the recent past. Ex-Yugoslavia, the Gulf war and the Rwanda genocide are marked by “indecisionism”. A joint stand was never taken. And the same goes for the present circumstances. It’s the case of Afghanistan, Al-Qaeda, and poor human rights defence. Not to mention the Palestinian question, which for over half a century has been the – failed – testing ground for conflict resolution, and the fight against poverty across the planet. “One man one vote”, it was said on the eve of the birth of Eastern democracy. “One Government one voice”, we are tempted to say. And what about tomorrow? … and the day after? It’s a penumbra of positions, swinging between ever-more-determined words and weak action. With the time-clock bomb called Iran, with underdevelopment that strains to become development, with skyrocketing demographic trends, uncontrolled immigration flows, hunger and poverty rates that increase instead of decreasing, and human rights that are being trampled upon at unimaginable levels. While the world, in order to cross the ford, needs unified Europe that strives for unity.In spite of everything, the hope of putting an end to the European Babel characterising the international arena is stronger than ever. It is as concrete as the EU’s awareness that the course must be altered. Even though on the one side Member States’ diplomacies “uti singuli” are well-organized, consolidated, and sometimes displaying “partisanship” (in relations, in the form of governmental and humanitarian support, in geopolitical priorities), on the other, the Lisbon Treaty determined a radical change of course: one President, one “Foreign Minister”, one diplomatic corps. The new EU Institutions, while preserving their collegiality and sensitive to the messages and mandates of the Capitals, are now bound to the preservation of a common stand, they ought to reach a win-win compromise, privileging global – and not national – interest. Such positions necessitate inclusive and shared policies aimed at improving – rather than worsening – the situation at global level.If Europe shouldn’t manage to relinquish its dated habit of following the principle of “divide and conquer” to the benefit of the opposing strategy – unity and cooperation -, then Europe will fail, annihilating also the hopes of those who suffer. Maybe (following the successful experience at business level) the first step in this direction is to adopt one voice for peace, freedom, sustainable development and the defence of human dignity. We feel confident.