Thursday’s ‘summit’ of EU leaders [“Council meeting” ] looks like being fractious. They are stymied by the Czech constitutional court taking its time over the latest appeal and cannot get on with implementing the Lisbon Treaty which is really all they are interested in. On top of that the Commission itself ends its time in office officially two days later on Saturday. They’ll have to decide on temporary powers under the Nice Treaty instead of the new planned arrangements. Indded those unhatched chickens they counted have come home to roost!
Then there’s the little matter of the Czech demand - already informally accepted - for an opt-out from the Eiropean Convention of Human Rights. The Slovaks for the same reason now want it too and they say they will veto the agrreement with the Czechs if they don’t get it. Then the Hungarians threaten to veto that because they say the post-war settlement in Czechoslovakia affected them too and they are angry.
They’d like to get on agreeing a President and a foreign minister too but they can’t and anyway there’s no consensus yet. I also post below some extraordinary excerpts from an article by Irwin Stelzer which stirs the pot even more.
If it wasn’t a tragic march into the darkness it would be funny - a farce!
Christina
================================
EU OBSERVER 28.10.09
Czech decision on Lisbon treaty only after EU summit
HONOR MAHONY
BRUSSELS - The Czech constitutional court has indicated it will rule on whether the Lisbon Treaty is compatible with Czech national law next week, meaning EU leaders meeting in Brussels on Thursday (29 October) are unlikely to take a final decision on dividing the top jobs in the European Union.
Following a hearing on Tuesday on a legal challenge by 17 conservative senators, the court said it would reconvene on 3 November, when it is likely to give its verdict.
The decision leaves the EU summit to take place amid continued uncertainty about when and whether the Union will be able to make the switch to the Lisbon Treaty - a move that creates new EU president and foreign minister posts and determines the future shape of the European Commission, whose current mandate expires on Saturday.
All member states have approved the treaty except the Czech Republic whose president Vaclav Klaus has said he will not complete ratification until the court has had its say.
The Swedish EU presidency, which has been hoping for a decisive names-for-posts summit so it can concentrate on policy issues instead, said it needs clarity from Prague first.
"We cannot begin the consultations [on the names] until we have legal clarity. If we obtain legal clarity, then there is time for consultations and a first debate," said Swedish Europe minister Cecilia Malmstrom on Monday, with the momentum for a decision growing since Luxembourg leader Jean-Claude Juncker indicated he would like to be chosen as first occupant of the European Council president post.
These decisions may be put off to an extra summit in November.
Czech demands
Instead this week's traditional autumn summit of EU leaders will have to deal with the minutiae of an eleventh hour call by President Klaus for his country to be exempted from the rights charter contained in the Lisbon Treaty.
Mr Klaus made the surprise demand earlier this month arguing that adoption of the Charter would leave his country open to property demands by ethnic Germans expelled from Czechoslovakia under the so-called Benes Decrees after World War II.
The Czech move prompted Slovakia to say they would veto any solution for Prague if they do not get the same treatment.
"Even though the Benes Decrees aren't in use in practice and can't be used, they are part of the legal system of the Czech Republic and Slovakia ...and the legal protection for Slovakia and its public can't be lower than is the case in the Czech Republic," said Slovak foreign minister Miroslav Lajcak on Monday.
The Slovak stance then led to a retaliatory statement from Hungary. Budapest has cool relations with Bratislava following a 2007 decision by the country to reaffirm the Benes Decrees, which also led to the expulsion of Hungarians from the then Czechoslovakia. Relations are also strained over Bratislava's treatment of the ethnic Hungarians in Slovakia.
Hungarian foreign minister Peter Balazs threatened to block the Czech compromise if there is "one word about the Benes Decrees."
Mr Balazs' spokesperson told EUobserver that the country has four demands, including that the Czech text "should not have any reference to the past or any reference to national legislation ...and it should only concern the member state where ratification is still ongoing."
For its part the Czech government indicated the proposed solution will be as bland as possible. Czech Europe minister Stefan Fuele said Monday that the "Benes decrees" will not be mentioned in the opt-out text. "In our proposal we will not refer to any concrete part of our legislation," Mr Fuele said, according to Ceske Noviny.
He indicated that a possible solution would be to simply add the name of the country alongside Poland and the UK which are also exempt from the Charter of Fundamental Rights, but for different reasons.
The discussions on the Czech opt out which are set to run into the summit are taking place even though most analysts agree the charter will not lead to the property claims Mr Klaus says he fears.
================================
TELEGRAPH 28.10.09
Opponents of the Lisbon Treaty should back David Miliband -[CONDENSED]
Tony Blair would bring clout to the EU - not so the Foreign Secretary David Miliband, says Irwin Stelzer.
By Irwin Stelzer
Good news for those who are hoping that the new Lisbon Treaty will not increase the European Union's power and international standing. Two bits of good news, in fact.
First, the tide seems to be running against Tony Blair's candidacy for the presidency. Blair was the one man who could have made America and other countries take notice of the EU – to "stop traffic", to use David Miliband's phrase – and look to it rather than to Britain and other member states when seeking to co-ordinate policies. Apparently, never missing an opportunity to miss an opportunity, the eurocrats will opt for some unknown and charismatically deprived candidate.
Even better news for those who feel Lisbon is a step too far on the road to a superstate is the rumour that Miliband will be the EU High Representative for Common Foreign and Security Policy, the title concocted to conceal the true role of Foreign Minister, in command of a full ambassadorial corps, some 130 embassies (the one down the street from me in Washington is as large as almost any real nation's), and with the ability to sign treaties and contracts. Real power, if properly exploited. Which is why it would be a relief if Miliband is the choice of the clique charged with making the selection (nothing as messy as a democratic vote by citizens, or indeed on the treaty itself, is needed).
Miliband has a record of bumbling at the Foreign Office that is reassuring to those who do not want nation states superseded by an unaccountable bureaucracy when it comes to the making of foreign policy.
This year, the Foreign Secretary went to India, prompting an opposition politician to remark: "In recent years, there has been no bigger disaster than the visit of David Miliband." The Indian foreign ministry, in a mock defence of Miliband, pointed out that he is very "young".
It seems that the Foreign Secretary (a) said that he opposed having the accused perpetrators of the Mumbai massacre extradited from Pakistan to India; (b) suggested that India needs to "incentivise Pakistan" by showing "some movement on Kashmir"; (c) linked the Mumbai attacks to India's position on Kashmir, and (d) struck ministers in New Delhi as "arrogant".
Many who know the Foreign Secretary can testify to that last charge. He once asked me to come up to a party conference a day early so that we could chat the evening before the formal proceedings began. I did, and we did. In a tone reserved for kindergarten teachers talking to the least bright of their charges, he explained the Lisbon Treaty to me, arguing that it was in no way related to the constitution that had failed to win the necessary backing of Europe's citizens. He was, of course, wrong, both in tone and substance.
Shortly afterwards, Miliband had a meeting with some members of the press. Usually calm men and women emerged enraged at having been talked down to by a man who seemed to know less about foreign policy than they did.
This was all consistent with the performance of the Foreign Office in the recent debate by the UN Human Rights Commission over the Goldstone Report, which condemned Israel's attack on Hamas's rocketeers. One would have hoped that Miliband would vote against adopting the report, siding with the only democracy in the Middle East as it fought a clearly biased document, put before a body that specialises in Israel-bashing.
But Miliband was seemingly unable to stand up to the Arabists in the Foreign Office: indeed, he could not even get agreement from his advisers to abstain. Instead, Britain, which claims considerable expertise in Middle Eastern affairs, just did not show up.
Such are the Foreign Secretary's qualifications for the European job, in which he denies any interest. But with the era of Labour government coming to an end, Miliband's repeated lack of courage to challenge for the leadership, and the indelible impression of him posing with his banana, his days at the top table of British politics are also coming to an end.
So off to Europe, the home of failed British politicians, and of the EU gravy train of pay and perks. But not before doing his country one final disservice. [- - - - - - - - -] . [It is not] in Britain's interests for its Foreign Secretary to persuade Britain's allies that a Tory government will carry no weight in Europe. That will be damaging to Britain's international standing should the Tories win the next election – not exactly a proper activity for a sitting Foreign Secretary.
[- - - - - - - - -] [Miliband] may be gone from domestic politics permanently – although at 44 years of age he has a full life and many gaffes ahead of him. Given that the force of the treaty will depend on the quality of the key appointees, we should all be pleased if he does get the post.
Posts
