Treaty would not concede new powers on foreign policy, Charles Grant, Financial Times, 21 June 2007
Treaty would not concede new powers on foreign policy
Letter to the editor from Charles Grant
21 June 2007
Sir, Martin Wolf's
critique of the proposed new EU treaty ("This is a cynical plan for an
unnecessary European treaty", June 20) wrongly asserts that the new posts
of "president" and "foreign minister" would "centralise
decision-making in areas affecting security".
Each would replace the rotating presidency as, respectively, chair of the European
Council and chair of foreign ministers' meetings. The foreign minister would
also become a single external spokesman for the EU, replacing the trio of the
rotating presidency, the High Representative (Javier Solana) and the external
relations commissioner (Benita Ferrero-Waldner). The latter two run organisations
that work on the same problems (such as energy, Russia and the Middle East)
but do so separately, leading to different priorities and, too often, mixed
messages to the outside world. The treaty would merge those bodies into an "external
action service" that would support the foreign minister.
Neither the president
nor the foreign minister would have any executive power. Their authority would
depend on their powers of persuasion and the force of their personality.
The creation of
these two posts would enhance the EU's global influence, when it has a common
policy. But it would not shift power to the Union, since any EU foreign policy
would still require the unanimous consent of the foreign ministers.
