Towards the French Presidency of the EU

							               Brookings “the French Presidency of the EU”
                                         Pierre Lévy
                              (Washington 20 May 2008)

INTRODUCTION
It is a great pleasure to be here at the Brookings. Good opportunity to share views with a
distinguished audience on the forthcoming French Presidency (FP) of the EU Council a few
weeks before the 1st of july. I recognize in the title of our session (Sarkozy’s ambitions for
Europe : the french presidency) Justin Vaïsse’s sense of marketing. But it rightly underlines
the importance of the personal dimension in European affairs and more generally in
diplomacy.

Personal remark : a few years ago, I would have never thougth being asked again to talk (and
also to participate) in a FP. Being at the cabinet of the minister for Europe, Pierre Moscovici
between 1997 to 2002, I was therefore actively involved in our presidency in 2000. Nearly
alive in december (my idea : to print T- shirts I survived the FP), a bit bitter (Nice treaty, not a
nice treaty), waiting for the tribute of history (the last 8 years did demonstrate it works), we
thought later on it would be the last time, as the EU constitution would change the system.
But we know what happened. And here we are again. Once again, for the last time ? Normally
yes.

To day, I will of course speak about the priorities of our presidency. But I will do it briefly.
There are already some speeches of my authorities presenting the broadlines. I find more
interesting in front of this qualified audience, to explain how a presidency works, what we
want to achieve and the limits / constraints of our action. And also share with you some views
about the state of the EU and the world reflected by this presidency.

I / THE PRIORITIES

   1) It is always thru this angle that one presidency is explained. But you should keep in
      mind the reality. In fact, the content of a presidency is a combination of 3 trends
      or dynamics :
   - continuity : to carry on the on going work; conclude dossiers at maturity
   - innovation : to bring new impetus; to launch new initiatives
   - reaction/anticipation : to deal with more or less expected crisis (9/11 belgian Pr; Irak
      Greece). A lucky presidency is also a good one (and vice versa).

Mitterand’s speech in 1995 in Strasbourg EP : Nos priorités vous paraîtront banales et
j’espère qu’elles le sont, parce que cela marquera tout simplement la continuité des
présidences qui ont pour mission de contribuer autant que possible à la réussite de notre
entreprise, l’Allemagne hier, l’Espagne demain et les autres, mais enfin ces priorités, je vais
les préciser. II y a peut-être une spécificité française. Ce sera à vous de l’estimer.

Huge difference (difficulty in terms of communication and pedagogy ) : not possible to
identify the FP with a single issue (ex. 1999 Germany agenda 2000; 2000 France treaty,
enlargement Dk in 20003; financial negociation UK; treaty germany in 2007)
You will find in our priorities these 3 dimensions with a french flavour

2 Remarks :
- worst time for national interest. The presidency’s role is not to impose one’s country’s view,
but to chair the EU Council and find consensus and compromises to bring forward concrete
answers to common challenge. Extremely important to reinforce confidence in the current
context;
- importance of continuity : With our the Czech republic and Sweden, need to seek elements
of compromise and consensus to build an 18 month agenda for Europe.

2) What are actually the priorities ?
4 priorities sustainable devt (Europe can promote a greener Europe, secure energy supplies),
adopt an integrated approach of migration, European defense (strengthen European Union’s
capabilities to ensure peace and stability), refondation of the CAP.

2. 1 / Our first priorities sustainable devt : climate change and energy.
France aims at reaching an agreement on the climate/energy package, in line with the
objective that was agreed at the Spring European Council march 2007. to reduce greenhouse
gas emissions by 20% (from 1990 levels), decrease primary energy use by 20%, and increase
the use of renewable energy sources (now at 8.5% of the energy mix) to 20% – all this by the
year 2020. It is a whole set of issues including reduction of European greenhouse emissions in
order to combat global warming, diversification of sources of energy, and greater security in
energy supplies across Europe.
Essential to our home work. Many regulations to adopt. Objective is to get a political
agreement in December and then formal approval in 2009. It is an ambitious goal as we must
achieve consensus on a fair burden sharing within the EU that leads to efficient paths of
reduction of CO2 emissions.


Without getting into the details, 3 elements of a triangle :
   - competitivity : energy secure and not expensive Our low carbon economy shall at the
       same time remain a competitive economy. Quota restitutions and free quotas, that
       would be in conformity with WTO rules, may be the adequate way forward.
Question of fair competition
   - sustainability : EU contribution to fight with global warming. Very important for the
       EU. No other regional organisation can act as a leading player on climate change and
       set high standards in the Copenhagen negotiations round in 2009. It is a matter of
       credibility, of world stability and of ensuring the well being of our children and
       grandchildren.
   - Security We are also counting on reinitiating discussion on a European energy strategy
       because current events have shown that the energy problem is becoming increasingly
       “strategic”. Energy policy is a good example of a field where we could benefit from
       more external unity.

This is mainly about seeking a level playing field between consumers and producers, because
external producers cannot expect an open EU market without reciprocity.
We will therefore strive to secure European energy supplies and foster cooperation between
major gas producers, transit countries and destination countries. Claude Mandil, the former
executive director of the International Energy Agency, has just published recommendations
that will contribute to shape our proposals together with the Commission.
2.3 / Our second priority will be immigration and asylum.

It is striking to see how member States, whatever their culture, history the political direction
of their government, are now acutely aware of their interdependence and of the knock- on
effects one’s decision can have on their European partners. They also feel the need to cope
with the likely decrease of European population by 2020-2030.

We will then propose a Pact at the level of Heads of State and Governments that will enshrine
strong commitments for a long-term, balanced and efficient management of migration flows.
It will also build on the concept of the global approach to migration forged in Hampton Court
in 2005, under the UK Presidency.
It will tackle five main themes and take into account the specific status of Ireland, Denmark
and the UK:
    - enhancing border controls,
    - looking at how Member States and the EU can make legal migration a success both for
         citizens and migrants by helping them to integrate and make a positive contribution to
         our society and their own.
    - implementing an effective return policy of illegal migrants,
    - building a comprehensive and integrated approach of asylum, and promoting co-
         development with transit and origin countries.

On the latter topic, a ministerial euro-African conference will be organised in Paris on 20-21
October. Special attention will be given to the brain drain in the health sector, and
development aid on education and governance.

2. 4 / our third priority, which is Defence.

No need to spend too much time on the past and the acquis St Malo. A lot of progress since
(mechanism; operations,...). Carry on this impetus

This initiative stressed 4 important guidelines : all nations of the Union willing to take part
were invited, no loss of sovereignty was envisaged, new and real capabilities had to be built,
and this strategy was consistent with the role and responsibility of NATO. I believe the same
guidelines can be maintained for our new commitments. Where are we now ?

   a) SES : First, our security strategy dates back to 2003. Significant devt (beginning of a
      corpus for CFSP/SDP and external action. Since then, new threats have emerged, the
      2003 threats have evolved, especially proliferation and food security, the Eastern
      enlargement has been successfully managed, as well in NATO as in European Union,
      a neighbourhood policy has been developed and a European Defense Agency has been
      set up. Europe needs to must update its common security strategy. Assess what has
      been done. Integrated approach , more operational Key role of Solana.

   b) Second, we need to use proper instruments to be able to implement this strategy. The
       EU has conducted so far some 15 ESDP operations.
Thanks to those ESDP operations which were often conducted within the framework of
NATO and with NATO resources, we can make an initial assessment to determine the way
forward. Need to have at our disposal all the relevant options (berlin +, framework nation
activationg one OHQ; EU activating center of operations). Concerning this last point, need to
develop also capacity to conduct and planify operations (not another SHAPE)

   c) Capabilities :
   - structural cooperation : develop with an inclusive approach.
   develop European military capabilities, available to both the EU and NATO, in particular
   in the fields of A 400 M, carrier group operations, and helicopters. Civilian capabilities
   (onj 2020)
   d) President Sarkozy’s visit to the United States and the Bucharest summit at the
        beginning of April showed that France could take new responsabilities within NATO,
        provided that, simultaneously, progress was made on the European defence policy. I
        believe that a new and trustworthy relationship can be built on this ground.

All these issues are difficult ones. I am not saying at all that we’ll be able to resolve it during
the French presidency; what we would like to do is to take it forward. Key objective is to
carry the efforts to make the EU an active global player .

        2.4 CAP: draw a distinction between the “health check” decided in 2003 (for 2008/13),
and the long term perspective post 2013. Context is interesting . importance of food security
(supply, safe conditions ) for Europe and globally, contribute to other issues (envirt, climate
change, protect landscapes). These dramatically changed international circumstances. This
new context has mixed effects on the traditional questions associated with C.A.P., and it
certainly pleads in favor of lowering agricultural subsidies and updating the whole system.
But at the very least, it provides a long-term rationale for maintaining and adapting a policy
whose existence has been questioned, but which has resulted in the preservation of strong
agricultural capacities in Europe.

Some other important issues to mention :

   a) Importance of the external dimension. 10 summits, 50 ministerial meetings. A lot of
       meetings with third countries (ASEM, India, China, Russia, Ukraine…).
   b) Project UfM now on tracks (summit in Paris 13/07 ). Meeting MFA and thematic
       meetings (trade, finance, health, water,...)
   c) prepare the implementation of the Lisbon treaty. Supposed to come into force
       01/02/09
appointments (PR EC, PR Com, HR) ; Joint external service. Not easy because of the
contexte.

II / THE CONTEXT AND THE STATE OF EUROPE

1 / the institutional issue.
Ratification process of the Lisbon treaty. Good hope (next step : Irish referendum 12/06)

Asset : we will close a cycle of institutional negociations which lasted more than 10 years;
start to write a new page; now look forward ; concentrate on substance. A lot of expectations
towards the FP (and we have some experience). overall elements for a strong dynamics could
be there.
Good conjunction of the political cycles in MS : stability (germany, Italy, Uk, spain)
Liability/ Disadvantage : Sensitivity nervousness. Top priority is to ratify. some MS afraid
of polluting effects of some initiatives. This context is not favourable for great initiatives or
even proper work (ESS).
Period of institutional transition . some example of the constraints :
    - EP will benefit of a more favourable law making process with Lisbon (codecision
        immigration, agriculture) . not a huge incentive to conclude before ,
    - Election in june 2009 , new institutions and people . complex to prepare appointments
    - We will have a lot of work to do in a very short spell of time. The legislative agenda is
        always very busy when we are close to the end of the Commission’s and the European
        Parliament’s tenure.
2nd semester PR always shorter

2 / international agenda
     a) differences in political dynamics :
USA election (no summit). But extremely important for us to be set to work efficiently with
the new administration. I do believe that what we will achieve or not will have huge impact .
or at least is of great interest to the US (discussion yesterday evening and this morning); PR
Sarkozy policy towards the US. Positive effect on the EU .
Russia : new equilibrium medvedev/poutine deal with an assertive Russia , also key partner.
Summit in November. Hope to open negociation on the new agreement;

   b) crises : middle east, iran, too long to list unfortunately.

   3 ) Method more important than ever
   - The backstage / cuisine : huge number of groups
   - The Franco-German relationship remains the core of our vision of European policies,
     but it should not be exclusive. A fruitful and intense cooperation with the UK is a key
     factor for success.
   - In an enlarged EU, every MS is important : build consensus, create confidence.
     Importance of bilateral relations (we rediscover them, role of embassy in MS cf White
     paper).

   CONCLUSION
     Europe is in transition : this situation demonstrates the great importance the FP to put
     it back on tracks and its limits


We hope then that the French Presidency will be an opportunity to show that Europe can
achieve institutional reforms, but, also, and above all, deliver concrete results. Results that
matter to European citizens (proofs of Europe), and demonstrating its added value to action by
individual member states.

EU will not change from night to day. Paradox of the coming years : EU relevance,
expectations in globalization; transatlantic relation. But a lot of heavy questions are still ahead
(identity , borders, content , level of integration) to be able to build the political Europe we
French want; deliver results and dreams
White paper will be very “ European oriented” end june.