Same party, but the two EPP presidents shouldn't be too matey. (EC)

So that was it then. The hearings of the new commissioners are over, bar for the one for Bulgaria’s replacement candidate, Kristalina Georgieva, which will pass quietly. At least in comparison with that of her ‘predecessor’, Rumiana Jeleva. But then what?

Well, once the European Parliament has approved the new Commission, which it will do on 9 February, five years of institutional peace will follow…though that is unlikely to be entirely correct, there is no doubt that all three main EU institutions – the Commission, the Parliament and the Council of Ministers – will do their best not to quarrel. At least José Manuel Barroso will want it that way. “Hey! Let’s be friends,” seems to be his slogan for

his second Commission. At least so far.

But being a consensus-builder is the last thing Barroso should be aiming for now. That is the last thing the EU needs right now. Instead he needs to put on a brave face and tell other European leaders what should be done to bring continent forward, not just concerning the financial crisis, but on every front. As goes for the MEPs, with more powers granted to them under the Lisbon treaty, they should use every opportunity possible to pick a fight with the other institutions. Only that way will they prove their seats worthy.

Not so cheerful today

Clearly, the Cockerill Report got it all wrong yesterday by claiming that the current crop of candidates for the next European Commission would be approved by MEPs. Though, in all fairness, the decision by Rumiana Jeleva to withdraw her candidacy today was her own, and not taken by European Parliament, and most likely she was pressured to do so by her boss, Boyko Borisov, the prime minister of Bulgaria.

And it was the right decision. Socialist and Liberal MEPs were right in claiming the she was not competent for the job she had been assigned. Her alleged past was too muddled in financial grey areas. And if the claims were right, Jeleva was also right to step down as foreign minister of Bulgaria, too. (Though she must surely be regretting accepting the nomination for the Commission now.)

Given that the hearing of Jeleva’s replacement, Kristalina Georgieva, a technocratic vice-president of the World Bank, will probably take place on 26 January, it is very likely that the approval of the next Commission will be delayed further.

No doubt, all this could have been avoided if Barroso had carried out some basic background checks on his commissioners-designate.

Say what? Rumiana Jeleva performed poorly at the Parliament...

Last Friday, Commission President José Manuel Barroso came to her rescue saying that she had done nothing improper and had reported her financial dealings correctly. Today, she got the backing of the centre-right EPP group. And though they would probably like to disapprove of her, the Socialists in the Parliament will be too worried about a centre-right attack on the Maros Sefcovic, Slovakia’s nominee, the continue their stabbing at Jeleva. And now that leading Roma groups have come out in support of Sefcovic, the centre-right will dampen their attack too.

As for the Liberals, they will keep their mouth shut out of fear of an attack on Cecilia Malmström, Sweden’s nominee, who will be

‘tested’ by MEPs tomorrow.

No doubt, commissioners-designate and MEPs will all be shaking hands and making up by mid-day tomorrow. And come 26 January, MEPs will give their stamp of approval to the whole Barroso II Commission.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.