|
Europe after 11 September
Speech by Jack Straw, Foreign Secretary, 11 December 2001
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I would like to congratulate Charles Grant and the Centre for European Reform on publishing such a stimulating pamphlet. 11 September forced us all to confront our deeply-held assumptions and to re-think our priorities. One short-term consequence of the atrocities and their aftermath has been that Europe has all but vanished from the headlines and front pages. Yet the questions the EU raises - about Britain's role in the world, about the way we relate to other nations, and, yes, about our sovereignty - are more important than ever.
NATIONS ARE STRONGER WHEN THEY WORK TOGETHER
One lesson which has been brought home to us all in the last three months is this: that nations are stronger when working together than when alone. The natural alliance between the nations of North America and Europe has been at the heart of the international coalition against terrorism. Colin Powell's visit to London today, three months to the day since the atrocities, underlines the strength of this bond.
Isolationism cannot work in the modern world. When events in the most remote and alienated place on Earth can have such an immediate impact on the richest and most cosmopolitan city in the world, it is clear that we are not so much independent from each other as interdependent of each other. And we therefore have to re-think our attitudes to concepts like 'independence' and 'sovereignty'.
SOVEREIGNTY
Isolationists think of sovereignty as being rather like virginity: something that comes under severe strain in a close relationship; and something that, once lost, is gone forever. But sovereignty is not like that. It has never been absolute. Absolute sovereignty, for the isolationists, would be the situation of an island people, wholly isolated from any contact with the outside world.
But, in fact, for such a people, sovereignty would be meaningless. Sovereignty defines the position of a nation in relation to other nations and peoples. And that sovereignty, these relationships, can take many forms.
In today's world, by pooling sovereignty, a people may end up with more, not less, control over their lives. This is because, in an interdependent world, our security and prosperity depend on our ability to influence events in the rest of the world, not on our ability to stop others from influencing us.
Our domestic security is guaranteed to the extent that we assume responsibility for global security. Our strength as an independent nation derives from the strength of the alliances and partnerships we make with others.
For over 50 years, we have been a full and enthusiastic member of Treaty-based organisations like NATO, which pools responsibility over our national defence - an area which goes right to the heart of our sovereignty.
We pool sovereignty in the United Nations, where Security Council resolutions have the force of international law. We secure a stable trading environment for our exports by submitting ourselves to a rules-based system in the World Trade Organisation. Our membership of these groupings is relatively uncontroversial in the UK. So why should the EU be any different?
Well, the EU is different. Pooling our sovereignty, where we choose to, in the EU is still more important, because it strengthens our ability to meet so many other shared challenges which have a real and daily impact on our national life.
PRACTICAL BENEFITS OF EU MEMBERSHIP
This is not just a theoretical point. I am convinced that the strongest arguments of all for our membership of the European Union are the practical benefits which we get from being part of it. If you ask the British people, of course they will express concern at losing our ability to take decisions on our own. Indeed, in our recent poll, 61% of people said just that.
But our poll also showed that people like all the practical benefits which the EU delivers - cleaner air, safer food, cheaper imports, the freedom to live, work and travel where they like, the fight against crime and drugs. All of these things have been delivered - could only have been delivered - by pooling sovereignty where we choose to.
So if you ask people the theoretical question of whether they want to preserve their sovereignty, you will always get the answer 'yes'. But if you ask them the practical question of whether they want to give up the benefits of a Single Market, a clean environment, safer jobs and the rest, the answer is a resounding 'no'. In their daily lives, British people opt again and again for the benefits of shared sovereignty.
And in the weeks since 11 September, the EU has shown its value to us yet again. The EU has made significant progress on no fewer than 40 measures to fight a threat which goes right to the heart of our citizens' concerns but which no government can fight alone - namely the fight against terrorism.
These measures include:
a common definition of terrorist offences;
common measures to freeze the assets of terrorist suspects;
closer co-operation between our national law enforcement and counter-terrorist agencies;
and tougher rules on air transport security.
And they include a common European arrest warrant, so criminals cannot evade justice by border-hopping.
Italy's refusal last week to agree the details of the warrant has caused some people to scoff about our ability to achieve effective results in Europe. I disagree. I hope we can still reach agreement at Laeken. But Italy's position illustrates an important point. That these decisions are taken by the member states, not the Commission or the European Parliament. Moreover, decisions of this magnitude are taken by unanimity.
We do not always get exactly what we want in the EU. Being part of the EU does not mean that fourteen other countries automatically fall into line behind the British position. We have to negotiate, and sometimes we have to compromise. But there can be no doubt that in one area after another, the EU gives us greater strength to look after the interests of the British people.
OUTCOMES NOT PROCESS MATTER IN THE EU
I dwell on the practical benefits, because it is outcomes, not process, that matter in the EU. Yes, the institutional structure of the EU is important. The Council of Ministers, the European Commission, the Court of Justice and the European Parliament each play an essential role in making sure the EU delivers benefits in the common interest of all our citizens.
And yes, reform is needed, in some areas urgently, to make sure the EU goes on delivering. When Tony Blair and I attend the Laeken European Council later this week, one of the key decisions we will take with our colleagues is to launch a Convention to examine the structures and procedures of the Union, and suggest ways of making them work better.
But we should all avoid giving the impression that institutional reform is about navel-gazing. In truth, it is only Eurosceptics and arch-federalists who get hung up on the shape of the institutions as an end in themselves, and tied up in the old, arid debate about whether the Community method or the intergovernmental method are the only answer.
The reality is that both methods are right, depending on the circumstances. Those who argue that the Community method is the only way forward would close off options for closer co-operation where member states are not prepared to give up their right of veto.
The current mix is about right. What matters is what the EU does. Fundamentally, the EU is a means to an end, consisting of security and prosperity. This is perhaps clearer than ever at a time when both our security and our prosperity have come under attack. We need the EU to remain outward-looking and focussed on these practical benefits. At the same time, we have to recognise that the world does not end at Europe.
DEALING WITH THE WORLD'S PROBLEMS
Another vital lesson of 11 September is that we cannot afford to neglect our interests and responsibilities anywhere in the world. Over many years, the world's neglect allowed Afghanistan to become a haven for terrorists, with devastating consequences.
But it is not just the Afghan people who have been excluded from the benefits of security and prosperity which we in Europe take for granted. Conflict, poverty, discrimination and injustice still blight the lives of millions in every part of the globe. Individuals' rights, especially women's rights, are ignored with impunity. Communities collapse, societies disintegrate and states fail. And where this happens, we put at risk the basis of global society itself.
What 11 September did was to crystallise the need, and focus the political will, to deal with the world's problems. Just as pooling our sovereignty in the EU has made a huge difference to the lives of people at home, I believe we can improve the lives of people all over the world by pooling our influence with our EU partners.
The EU makes us stronger at home, and stronger abroad. The same logic applies. It would be foolish to waste the potential of the EU as a force for good in the world. It is time we all recognised that the EU allows us to magnify and strengthen our influence as a nation on the world stage. The EU's Common Foreign and Security Policy has been a reality for a long time. But, to some, it still seems somehow counter-intuitive.
COMMON INTERESTS
In the 19th century, the countries of Europe carved up much of the globe between them, spurred on by their mutual rivalries and competing interests. Today, the legacy of past rivalries and these close historical relationships has become a strength as we work together in our common and global interest.
The whole Union benefits from Britain's experience and expertise in the Commonwealth; France's knowledge of La Francophonie; Spain's links with Latin America; Germany's with Eastern Europe; Italy's with North Africa; Finland's with Russia; and so forth.
Once we have agreed joint objectives and our overall approach, each country and each institution plays to its strengths and deploys its resources in the common cause.
The EU's collective response to the crisis in East Timor in 1999, for example, was effective because we all benefited from the historical perspective of the Netherlands and Portugal, with their long-standing interest in the region.
The key point, which some still find difficult to grasp, is that today, unlike 100 years ago, we all share the same fundamental interests and values: democracy, human rights, the rule of law, free trade, good governance, sustainable development.
On occasion we have differences of emphasis and of approach with our European partners. But what unites us is far greater than what divides us. The experience of 11 September and our shared response to the common threat since then are a graphic illustration of this point.
THE EU AND THE US
These show, moreover, that the same values are shared by the United States and the EU countries. In times of tranquillity, the focus naturally shifts to those areas where our views differ. It takes an immediate shared threat to throw into relief the reality: that Americans, Europeans, and people in many other parts of the world which have joined us in the international coalition, all share the same beliefs, values and interests.
As the front page of Le Monde put it on September 12, 'Nous sommes tous américains'. And as successive US governments have made clear, the US has a strong interest in seeing the EU get its act together in foreign policy.
Henry Kissinger, famously - and maybe apocryphally - once asked, 'If I want to know what Europe thinks, who do I phone?' I was struck by the passage in Charles Grant's pamphlet where he maintains that Kissinger's present-day successor, Colin Powell, has found an answer to that question, with his frequent conversations with Javier Solana since the beginning of the present crisis.
The point here is not that the EU has supplanted the rôle of the member states. Of course it hasn't. I and other European Foreign Ministers have worked more closely than ever with Colin Powell over the last three months. But the fact that Europe is getting its act together, and that Britain has significant influence over the decisions of the 15, makes us more, not less, valuable as an ally to the United States. All the member states, as well as the US and other countries, benefit from the fact that Europe has developed a distinctive voice, whose views are taken seriously.
THE EU AS A FORCE FOR GOOD IN THE WORLD
Much of this is down to the personal role played by Javier Solana and Chris Patten. I want to take this opportunity to pay tribute to them both for the respect which they have won for our joint efforts, not just in the present crisis but in those which went before.
Their work in the Balkans, in particular, has been tireless and highly effective. Javier Solana and his Special Representative, first François Léotard and now Alain Le Roy, have helped avert a civil war in Macedonia. The EU's material effort, worth €4.65 billion over the next five years, is already making a massive difference to the infrastructure and living standards across the whole Balkans region.
Here, as I suggested earlier, we have got the mix right. The intergovernmental method ensures that the EU's political and strategic decisions are endorsed by all of the member states. Meanwhile the Community method has allowed us to push ahead with reconstruction; and at the same time open EU markets to exports from the Balkans and negotiate agreements aimed at reintegrating those countries into the European mainstream.
Where, just three years ago, the region seemed poised to descend into further chaos and bloodshed, today the EU's individual and collective efforts have helped forge stability, democracy and the rule of law. It is a valuable experience, which we can now put to use in support of UN efforts to rebuild Afghanistan.
REALISING OUR POTENTIAL
But the EU has yet to realise its full potential as a global actor. I want to see the EU pulling its weight in the world. We have to have the ambition and the vision to be an effective force for good, which upholds international values and shows that Europe can give something back.
The EU is the world's largest concentration of rich countries. We owe it to ourselves, and to the world, to safeguard the benefits of globalisation by sharing them with countries which have not been so fortunate.
Poverty is the root cause of much conflict and chaos, especially in Africa. Two years ago, the EU's debt relief package for the poorest countries set an excellent example of what we can achieve.
The EU also played a constructive role in securing the deal at Doha which launched a new WTO Trade Round. Our challenge now is to deliver the Doha development agenda, to show that dismantling barriers to dignity and equality is just as important as removing barriers to global trade and finance.
That means reforming the Common Agricultural Policy and improving market access for those goods, like textiles, where developing countries enjoy a comparative advantage. And it means fulfilling the potential of the EU's development assistance programme, which is, after all, the world's biggest.
We want to bring it up to the level of the most effective donors among the member states, with a more rigorous focus on poverty reduction and a more efficient use of resources.
The EU also has a potentially much greater role to play in upholding human rights; supporting global primary education; promoting good governance, which is the key to avoiding failure in flawed societies; and environmental issues. Our collective strength must ensure that the EU makes a positive contribution to next year's World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg.
We have the tools to make an important contribution to global prosperity, and we have to use them better. But our next challenge is to develop tools to help maintain global peace and security.
EUROPEAN DEFENCE
Three years ago, Tony Blair and Jacques Chirac launched an initiative to give the EU a role in military and civilian crisis management, the European Security and Defence Policy. Our experience in the Balkans had highlighted the need for Europe to shoulder a greater part of the burden of regional and global security.
Following 11 September, the need is more acute than ever. Military operations against terrorists are not among the intended tasks for ESDP. Nor, for that matter, is territorial defence, which remains squarely with NATO. But ESDP will add to the pool of relatively scarce capabilities which are available for dealing with crises and therefore contribute to the overall effort against terrorism.
If the EU and others are better able to lend a hand to the UN when it calls for forces to conduct peacekeeping operations, we might be better able to avert terrorism in the first place.
This week, at Laeken, we expect to draw the reasonable and realistic conclusion that the EU is now able to conduct some crisis management operations. This means we have the framework to fulfil basic tasks like humanitarian relief missions, but not yet more demanding ones like peace enforcement. But as the assets and capabilities at our disposal increase, so too will our ability to make a positive contribution to global stability.
Civilian capabilities, like police officers, are especially useful because, as we have seen so often, the ability to reconstruct a post-conflict society is as much part of crisis management as the military intervention itself.
Our vision is of an EU which can use these capabilities, together with existing economic, development, trade, justice and home affairs policies, to play a role from the first reaction to a crisis right through to rehabilitation and reconstruction. This should be a source of pride for our citizens and prestige for our nation.
CONCLUSION
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Tony Blair spoke about our approach to the world after 11 September. He said, 'This is a moment to seize. The kaleidoscope has been shaken. The pieces are in flux. Soon they will settle again. Before they do, let us re-order this world around us.'
The EU is potentially one of our most powerful tools for doing just that: re-shaping the world. This is an ambitious agenda. But the EU has always been an ambitious organisation.
The scope of the projects in which the EU member states are engaged together is breathtaking. In the next twelve months, we shall take vital steps on reforming Europe's economies; turning Europe into an area of freedom, security and justice; acting against terrorism; launching Euro notes and coins; building up our peacekeeping capacity; and enlarging the Union to the East and South. Each of these reforms will make the lives of our citizens better.
In an age of interdependence, our lives are affected more and more by forces and events which occur beyond our borders - in Europe and further afield.
This unsettles many people. We are used to electing governments to provide us with certain benefits, our security and prosperity above all. But governments can no longer do this through action which applies only on our national territory, if ever they could.
My argument today is that we can recapture at the supranational level those forces which now elude us at the national level. By working with our partners in the EU, we can do what we were elected to do; re-enfranchise our people; and show them that their political choices matter.
All of this was true before 11 September. Today, it is urgent. Our challenge is to show our people why the EU strengthens the international community, strengthens our democracy, strengthens our nation state and strengthens our sovereignty. Our security and prosperity depend on it.
|
