Posted on 12/13/2003 4:53:33 PM PST by Pikamax
Chirac blames Blair as EU constitution talks collapse By Colin Brown and Francis Elliott in Brussels (Filed: 14/12/2003)
The European Summit in Brussels collapsed in failure yesterday after talks on a new EU constitution reached deadlock over the voting rights of smaller countries.
Tony Blair speaks during a press conference in Brussels Tony Blair insisted, however, that the humiliating inability of heads of government to get beyond the first items on the summit agenda did not spell doom for the constitution. "We have got to find a way through. We have got the time to do it," he said.
The meeting failed to resolve a highly technical dispute between Germany and Poland over the voting rights of less populous countries.
In private, Jacques Chirac, the French president, blamed Britain for not supporting the Franco-German position. Publicly, he indicated that a hard core or "pioneer group" of states would push ahead with European integration regardless of how the new members of the EU behaved.
"It will give an engine, it sets the example," said Mr Chirac. "I think it will allow Europe to go quicker, further, and to work better."
His announcement, agreed with Gerhard Schroder, the German chancellor, will alarm Mr Blair, who has long feared that Britain - still outside the euro - will suffer economically and politically if a "two-tier" structure becomes formal in Europe.
Silvio Berlusconi, the Italian prime minister, said that he opposed the Chirac proposal. "I am not in favour of an initiative by the six founding members. I don't believe it is appropriate to form groups of countries. It is important for all countries to work collectively and on an equal footing."
Mr Berlusconi did little to disguise his bitterness that Italy's presidency of the EU had ended so ignominiously.
The new constitution was intended to streamline decision-making within the EU to avoid bureaucratic and political gridlock when 10 more countries join next May. Its provisions, drawn up over two years of wrangling, allow for more majority voting and cover areas of policy including immigration, taxation, defence, foreign affairs and social issues.
It is understood that Mr Blair believes rapid progress on the constitution, which was drafted by Valery Giscard d'Estaing, the former French president, is essential if Britain is not to be left behind.
Some of Mr Blair's most senior Cabinet colleagues last night urged him to shelve the plans until after the general election. One told the Telegraph: "A compromise would have been a compromise too far for the British electorate." Another said that Mr Blair had become too "evangelical" about the constitution.
Gordon Brown, Jack Straw and David Blunkett were said to be relieved that Britain's "red lines" against harmonisation of taxation, justice, defence and social security were not breached. However, so little of the summit's agenda was properly debated that ministers regard this as a reprieve rather than a victory.
Mr Berlusconi called a halt to the marathon talks after Poland and Spain refused to back down over plans to overturn the voting system agreed at Nice three years ago.
Gisela Stuart, the pro-EU former minister who represented Britain on the drafting team for the constitution, has since been strongly critical of the draft. She said that France and Germany would have to accept the case for equal voting rights for Poland and Spain.
"We tried to reach a messy compromise and that didn't work," she said. "It tells you that something fundamental is going on. We should not try to sweep that under the carpet."
The Conservatives claimed that the debacle showed the ambitions of the constitution drafters had always been federalist - in spite of Mr Blair's denials.
Michael Ancram, the shadow Foreign Secretary, said: "The Government always claimed this was not an integrationist document, but just listen to the squeals now from the French, Germans and the Belgians. It completely destroys the pretence and shows that this was an attempt at further integration."
Mr Blair, who will make a statement to the Commons tomorrow, said: "To look at this in apocalyptic terms is rather misguided. It's a perfectly understandable disagreement that has arisen.
"Even if we had reached agreement today on a new system of voting it would not have taken the place of the voting arrangements agreed at Nice until 2009, which is rather a long time away. It's not an impossible mountain to climb."
Mr Blair said that it was important to "bank" the points which had effectively been agreed in Brussels this weekend.
These include an agreement in principle for a new defence unit to be established under the EU's flag, providing it does not compete with Nato. US alarm at the proposal was partially assuaged by guarantees about its operations.
Although the defence deal fell with the rest of the constitution, Britain, France and Germany are likely to revive it.
Like, what, Chirasmuck is now the head newt for this? France??
If I was Mr. Blair, I'd be asking the head frog questions such as....
Are you guys over that shade tree planting phase yet?
When will you learn to build an aircraft carrier that, you know, works like its supposed to?
France deserves to be kicked in the "Chirac" - often and hard.
They could not make a pimple on a decent country's a$$.
Other than that, they suck.
LVM
Why, Tony? ....Unless, of course, you desire the death of England.
At Animal Farm: Napoleon and the Dogs want Snowballs support.
Factions already? Or is Schroder just Chirac's bitch Schnauzer?
Excellent point :-)
Ooops, I think the mask just slipped and anyone with two brain cells to rub together can see just what old Jacque and Gerhard really had planned. Looks like Britain just escaped with their pocketbooks intact.
I was just skimming over a report on a German site.
"Spiegel - Online"....Schröder droht den EU-Abweichlern
Schroeder is blaming Poland for the debacle, hinting that to integrate Europe in the future one can't negotiate through national egotism. Germany, he insured, negotiated from the standpoint of the ability of a united Europe to act on it's own.
Schroeder mentions that the citizens of Poland shouldn't take all this personally, since they are dear to his heart.
The consideration is being made (initiated by Luxembourg)[yeah, right.] to begin negotiating important decisions with the 6 original Eoropean trade members, France, Germany, Belgium, Italy, Luxembourg and the Netherlands.
Fischer is attributed to the "two-speed" Europe quip a couple of weeks ago. Fischer was the odds on favorite to become the European foreign minister, BTW.
Schroeder is threatening the "deviationists" with the "two-speed" idea now, namely, negotiating with those countries that want more integration (he includes Great Britain, in that group).
Poland's foreign minister, Wlodimierz Cimoszewicz, said he wasn't going to sign any decision that weakened his own country politically.
The article mentions that Spain and Poland refused to relinquish the vote distribution accorded them in the Nizza agreement, and thus blocked any agreement.
France and Germany want a double majority, meaning a measure has to be passed by a majority of member nations (13 out of 25) that concomitantly represents 60% of the total population of the united Europe.
That's my opinionated interpretation of what I read, not a translation. I basically think Schroeder is a Schleimschei$$er (BS artist), and that the "double majority" argument is BS as well. If France and Germany want the double majority instead of the Nice agreement you can be damn well sure they know now they have that double majority established through bloc building they have already completed.
longjack
This is why the UN works so well (LOL). France is part of the upper tier (permanent SC member). The EU, with France having veto power, could be expected to work just as well for the other members.
More evidence that the US Federal legislature setup with the Senate giving nearly equal power (still some tenure, FBI file access, etc. inequalities in operation) to the individual states has great merit.
Shhhhh, don't give them any ideas. Not that they would emulate the US system, but it is a solution. Since Napoleon was unable to consolidate Europe, I doubt that Chirac will be able to dominate it either.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.