Let the fun begin

The UK’s TaxPayers’ Alliance are obviously leapfrogging ahead of all the other propaganda  will be published on the internet and elsewhere in the run-up to the European Parliament elections in June by poking at the EU’s Common Agriculture Budget. 

Although The Cockerill Report disagrees with their statements, it will be some amusing months if we get more of this sort.

To club or nor not to club a seal

Next week, MEPs will debate in Brussels whether to ban the trade in seal products. Unable to do something about the killing and eating of dogs in China, Western animal rights campaigner turned their attention to something that was a bit closer to home – although the regular hunting of seals only takes place in one of the EU’s member states, Denmark. But the hunt is carried out by Inuits in Greenland, which left the Union in the early 1980s. The two other culprits, at least in the eyes of animal rights campaigners, are Canada and Norway.

In Canada this year’s seal hunt started this week and for the faint-hearted it is not a pretty sight. It is, however, an important tool in that country’s effort to rebuild fish stocks that became depleted in the 1980s and the 1990s – and not just because of Canadian fisheries polices, but also because of Europe’s fishermen – in particular Spanish and British – that travelled to the great banks outside Canada (as they have done for centuries) in a bid to catch as much as they could. Hence, in order to rebuild stock, the killing of seal cubs is an important tools.

But equally important is the livelihood the hunt provides to those communities that participate in the hunt. And Canada, too, has an Inuit community that depends on catching seals.

In Norway too, the seal hunt (which is mostly carried out with shotguns) is an important tool in carrying out a sounds fisheries policy as well as providing an additonal income for the country’s northern communities – mostly indigineous  Sami people (Norway’s fisheries minister, Helga Pedersen, is of Sami origin).

Unlike most city abattoirs, seals killed in the northern hempishpere are killed without being tranquilized first – in ways that man have always killed animals. That is until some city dwellers who probably have never set foot in forest, never mind a fishing vessel, decided to ‘help’ these animals. Seals might be cute, but they are, like humans, predators that consume enourmous amount of fish each day and there is now reason, just because they look cute, to feel any more sentimental about these animals than, say, a fish.  Moreover, also unlike in cities, the people who hunt seals actually use every bit of the beast for something; clothes, meat, vitamins etc. Can all animal rights campaigners claim to live as environmentally sound as that?

The EU institutions – commissioner, ministers, ambassadors – should be ashamed to spend taxpayers money and time on debating whether to ban the trade in seal products. Instead they should look to these countries and take lessons on how to conserve the environment – especially how to manage fisheries.

Topolánek’s hell

He might wish he never uttered the word hell, but Mirek Topolánek, the prime minister of the Czech Republic, has been on the road to hell for much longer than this week. At least a bit longer.

Last week, Topolánek wrote a piece in European Voice, a Brussels weekly, entitled “Hell is ‘others’. But what others?”. He did not mention the US, but he goes on a bit about bad assets and why his country shouldn’t be blamed for these. But what is sure is that Topolánek seems to want to nothing to do with the ideas of Barack Obama and Timothy Geitner.

But what even more certain is that Topolánek regrets that he started on that long road to hell, that he wrote that article and that said “hell” in front of MEPs in the European Parliament, for he is not there just yet, and the road there, they say, is supposed to be a painful one. He might even get to see the Lisbon treaty pushed through before he gets there.

Topolanek’s downfall is not all bad

To most in Brussels (and those unfortunate enough to be attending the European Parliament plenary in Strasbourg) the news this afternoon that Czech government of Mirek Topolanek had fallen did come as a surprise. But that does not mean that many were too unhappy with the outcome of the no-confidence vote. In fact, for many in European politics, the Czech government, its presidency of the EU, but also Vaclav Klaus, the country’s president, has been annoying factor for months.

Many officials in and around Brussels want the Czechs’ presidency to finish as soon as possible so that the Swedes can take over. Since taking over after Nicolas Sarkozy (or was it the French?) in the middle of a financial crisis, as well as all the problems surrounding the Lisbon treaty, the Czech presidency has been nothing but a lame duck. Unfortunately that is most likely to

Only one is still smiling, just. (EC)

continue until the end of June as Jiri Paroubek, the leader of the Czech Social Democrats, said that the opposition would allow Topolanek’s government to sit out the presidency. Klaus is also likely to ask Topolanek to form either a caretaking or a new govenrment until elections can be held.

All this means that leadership of the EU in the coming months will be left largely in the hands of that other lame duck, Commission President José Manuel Barroso, who is more interesting in being re-nominated for second term as president of the European Commission. And most likely he will be so. But that does not bode well for EU decision-making in the coming months as populism, not realpolitik, will be the rule in time of crisis. Not only by Barroso, but by MEPs seeking re-election in the European Parliment elections in June, too. As goes for the leaders of the EU’s biggest member states, they seem currently incapable of taking leadership of anything, never mind the Union.

What could bode well for the EU, though, is that the fall of Topolanek highlights a trend that is increasingly manifesting itself across Europe: that the political left has not lost all will to regain power and powerful positions and more importantly that European citizens are not shifting their political preference even further to the right. Should that happen it would not only endanger the Lisbon treaty  – which is fiercely detested by many in the Czech establishment – but the EU as a whole.

A messy diplomatic tortilla

So it seems that José Luis Rodíguez Zapatero is not the only potent member of, in theory, his government. Carme Chacón, Zapatero’s Catalan defence minister, is apparently the one pulling the strings when it comes to Spanish foreign affairs and not the man you might would be doing so, Foreign Affairs Minister Miguel Ángel Moratinos.

It was Chacón who decided to burp out, on a visit to Spanish troops in Kosovo, that the ‘lads would be going home’. And it was Chacón who spent the weekend defending the Spanish government’s decision, while at the same time back-tracking on the time-scale for the Spanish pull-out from Kosovo: it might be 18 months, it might be a year, or it might be eight months she said on Sunday. All done and dusted in the media before she (or perhaps it should have been Zapatero) had discussed the issue with other NATO member states. Jaap Hoop de Scheffer didn’t know about it, the US wasn’t told about it and Spain’s ambassadors were not told about the decision. Moratinos was apparently told about the decision (but opposed it – although he later said he “supported” it) – but wasn’t listened to.

Zapatero is all ears to Chacón/Socialistas

Needless to say: Chacón (and Zapatero) has left Spanish diplomacy in a mess. The Americans are pissed off, as are other NATO allies. Not so much for deciding to pull its troop out (Spain is one of the few countries that does not recognise Kosovo as a state), but for not playing an honest game. Pulling out of Iraq could be justified as it was a result of Partido Popular/José Maria Aznar’s admiration for George W. Bush, but Kosovo was the policy of Bill Clinton – which then was what Barack Obama is today: the closest the Spanish Socialist will get to an ally in American politics (at least one in high office).

But clearly, Chacón will not be the one that will clear up the mess. She has already caused too much damage by playing too much internal politics on the global stage. Clearly, the decision to pull the troops out now has little to do with Spain wanting the to play a lesser role in geopolitics (take a closer look at Zapatero in the run-up to the G20 meeting, for example), but has all to do with appeasing the closest the Socialist have to allies in the Spanish parliament, the United Left (IU). Not allies in the strict sense, but Zapatero (and Chacón) needs them to push through key policies. Kosovo was meant to be a small sacrifice, but by playing the cards wrong, the Spanish government has lost more than it will win. And might not help them in the upcoming European Parliament elections either: ‘everyone’ in Spain realised instantly what was going on.

And mending bridges with the US and other NATO allies by the sending two boats to guards ships from Somalian pirates won’t do either. It seems like the only option Chacón has left Zapatero with is to send more Spanish troops to Afghanistan. And as much as she won’t like that – Chacón (and Zapatero) should perhaps listen more to Moratinos in the future.

Sarko’s (early) spring cleaning

Rachida Dati was not the only confidante of French President Nicolas Sarkozy to fall victim to, some would say, rather ruthless preparation for the European Parliament elections in June. Things are going the other way, too.

Alain Lamassoure, a (at least up until now) close confidante of Sarko and of main architects of the Lisbon treaty (which of course has to be ratified by Ireland) or was is that failed constitution,  was only  offered third place in UMP’s European campaign for the South-West. That list will now be headed by Dominique Baudis, a 62-year-old with two previous experiences as an MEP: in 1984-88 and in 1994-97.

Clearly,  64-year-old  Lamassoure has not taken lightly to the decision by what he though was a friend. Having been elected as an MEP three times, he now must feel similar to Ms Dati: betrayed. So why can’t he be number two you might wonder. Well, the simple fact is that one of the two top candidates has to be a women. Facing up to Sarko’s decision he said that he was too old to be playing a minor role and whether he wants third place seems very doubtful, too.

So who is next in what seems to be a very early spring cleaning effort by the French president?

The curious case of Rachida Dati

So, apparently the decision by French President Nicolas Sarkozy to get rid of Rachida Dati, the justice minister, seems to stem from the bedroom, at least according to the Telegraph, who quotes an unnamed French magazine. Dati it seems, had gotten into the habit of calling Sarko at all hours and, to the annoyance of his wife Carla Bruni (or is she also a Sarko now?), to his bedroom. Also, according to Libération, the president could no longer stand Dati, who recently caused amazement across Europe when she returned to work only five days after the birth of her daughter.

Will she be happy in Brussels?

But is Sarko really getting rid of Dati? For sure, she would most likely have preferred to stay in Paris and continue her glamourous lifestyle there, but, also according to Libé, the president wants “the best for Europe”. And that is something that shouldn’t be underestimated.

The French president has, especially during his country’s presidency of the EU, shown that he is committed to the European cause (although the 5th republic will always come first). It is clearly something he cares about and something he wants to make work. Because of that it is also understandable that he wants someone like Dati, who, despite her flaws, is a very capable and strong woman, in Brussels (or Strasbourg) to champion his causes alongside Michel Barnier, who  will lead the UMP’s European bid in Paris.

As for Dati herself, should she worry about all this? Having been humilated by the president this weekend, she is undoubtedly pondering why she didn’t accept his offer to stand as an MEP in the first place, instead of being forced to do so. But when it comes to the European Parliament (or the Commission) she has little to fear as it certainly is a place where she will be needed. Most for being a sometimes skilled politician, but because she represents something there is lack of around Schuman and beyond: Eurocrats with a non-European ethnic background and a single mother.

As for glamour and living the high life: that is something that is still possible to do as an MEP in Brussel. And nothing is more welcome than people adding a touch of colour to European affairs.

Barroso II… but when?

Unless something extraordinary should happen, José Manuel Barroso is certain to continue as president of the European Commission for a second term. He has apparently been promised this in a stitch-up the leaders of several of the EU’s ‘most important’ member states like the UK, France and Germany. (Are there really any other member states that matters?)

But since the Irish rejected the Lisbon treaty and are won’t hold another referendum until the autumn – which means that the Lisbon treaty is unlikely to come into force on 1 January at the earliest – the EU and its institutions will be left in constitutional quagmire. Members of the European  Parliament will seek to be re-elected (or not) in early June. But no one seems to know exactly how many will be elected: under the Nice treaty, which will constitute the EU’s aquis until it replaced by the Lisbon treay, there will only be 736 MEPs (as it was before Bulgaria and Romania joined in 2007). Under the Lisbon treaty there would be 751 MEPs. But hey, no doubt, money will be spent to have all those 751 MEPs elected – regardless of what treaty is in force.

As for the future Commission, this should, under normal circumstances, be appointed after the summer break and take up office at some point in September/October. But then again, not much is normal about the EU these days. Uncertainties about treaties create uncertainties for the future make-up of the Commission too. Will there be a reduction of commissioners as stipulated in the Nice treaty? Or will there be one commissioner for  each member state? And what about Croatia an Iceland – will these countries get a commissioner each, too? (When they join, of course…)

But one thing seems certain: Barroso is determined to stay and it increasingly looks as if his current fellow commissioners will have their mandates extended. A senior official seconded from one of the EU member states told The Cockerill Report that her plans take up role at her national ministry back home have been put on hold. Now, according to the official, the movers won’t be needed until well into 2010.e

The EU’s breakaway amnesia

Are we really doing the right thing now, Nicolas?

So it seems as if the EU – or more specifically leaders of that bloc of European countries aiming to improve the conditions of European citizens – have suffered another stroke of collective amnesia.

Gathering in Brussels earlier this week (1 September) leaders of the bloc’s 27 member states and most of the Union’s foreign ministers (with the exception of Denmark’s Per Stig Møller who stayed home after falling on his bicycle) – a total of 53 senior politician – managed, in just over three hours, to waffle together some sort of document ‘threatening’ to postpone further talks with Russia if that country does not withdraw its troops from Georgia.

Clearly, there was no need to hide that the EU’s relations with Russia has, also before the Georgia crisis, been strained for quite a while so there was no other options for the bloc but to get straight to point and say, albeit slightly hidden down in its conclusions, that this is about energy more than anything else. What they didn’t say clearly though, but what they most likely said behind closed doors would have been something along the lines of this: “What we really fear is that Russia will do to others and that we won’t get energy from those other countries either…”

Although EU leaders obviously would like to keep the gas and oil pipelines from Russia open, what they really fear is that Dmitry Medvedev and Vladmir Putin, president and president (sorry, prime minister) of Russia, will use their willingness to use violence to exhert control in their backyard to control other countries; energy resources. Countries such as Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan, but let’s not forget Iran, Iraq and other authoritarian regimes in the Middle East and Africa.

Although leaders attending the summit were right in that, perhaps, Russia was a bit heavy-handed in its efforts to, according to the Russians, “proctecting its own citizens”, it seems as there has been some collective failure, some sort of amnesia to recollect things as they happened. Led by Carl Bildt, the Swedish foreign minister, other EU leaders have followed in declaring their support and willingness to help reconstruct Georgia – clearly forgetting that it was actually Georgian forces that attacked South Ossetia first. An event that few, or none, EU leaders commented on – most likely because they were all away on their summer break.

But by following Bildt’s lead (a Russia-basher from a country that has declared that it has no interest in fossil fuels and will get all its energy needs from renewable in a few years) and agreeing on not condemning Georgia, too, they have left themselves with fewer option for dealing with Russia in future. Not only on matters concerning energy, but also on matters concerning human rights and sovereignty.