The Unknown Europe!

It would be easy, in the wake of two nearly unknown people being elected to the two most important positions in the European Union, to believe that this union, in its latest edition after the Barcelona Treaty, now tends towards a more colorless role in international political decision-making than it previously had. Such a belief is sustained by the fact that the position of President of the European Council, for which Britain had nominated a well-known face at the European and international levels, namely its former Prime Minister Tony Blair, has gone to someone unknown both in Europe and around the world, someone who was in fact not even widely known in his own country Belgium before occupying the post of Prime Minister less than a year ago, where he worked on restoring the fabric of Belgium, torn apart between its two “peoples”, the Flemish and the Walloons.

As for the second position, equal in importance to that of the president, that of High Representative for Common Foreign and Security Policy, which has become known according to the Treaty of Lisbon as that of Foreign Minister, it has gone to yet another unknown face, even in Britain itself, the country of origin of the new office-holder Catherine Ashton. Thus, after the world had for years grown used to dealing with Javier Solana, the elegant Spaniard who came to this office from a highly important position, that of former Secretary-General of NATO, world leaders now have to meet a new figure, one who had previously never dealt with foreign affairs, neither in her own country nor in the European Union, where she had previously occupied the post of EU Trade Commissioner, as she also holds a seat in the British House of Lords, a chamber of Parliament in which members are appointed without being elected.

In a region such as the one we come from, where the work of state institutions is vitally connected to the faces that stand at their head, we cannot understand that an institution the size of the European Union, which today includes 27 countries, can manage its affairs under the leadership of “unknown” figures. It is in our customs that the person is the institution of rule, and the institution is the person. In this meet equally political parties and governments, as well as intellectual and social bodies. Thus it will be difficult for those with a background of such “personification” to understand how leaders such as Nicolas Sarkozy, Angela Merkel and Gordon Brown must sit, starting from next January, at an EU meeting table headed by a person called Herman Van Rompuy.

Not just that, but how could a dull city like Brussels occupy such a position of prestige and eminence at the heart of Europe, hijacking the institutions of its union, at the expense of shinier and better established cities, such as London, Paris, Rome and others? Was this not the beginning of Europe giving up its bright cities and faces to the benefit of a city and a role more capable of forging consensus and repairing disputes?

To be fair, such reservation is not the offspring of our region alone, nor is it restricted to our culture. Wondering about the future of Europe’s role in the world, after the latest appointments, has led to the same questions in the European and international press as well. Everyone remembers the famous question once asked by former US State Secretary Henry Kissinger, when told that Europe had become an important player on the international stage: “who do I call if I want to call Europe?”

It would be difficult to say that beginning to implement the Treaty of Lisbon, in the way that we have seen, will pave the way to a European leadership on the world stage, one equivalent to the US’s firmly established leadership and to the rising leadership of China. The European project is different to begin with, both in terms of identity and of the process of decision-making. The countries gathered in the European Union still have their own interests and their independent concerns. Thus British Prime Minister Gordon Brown did not find it awkward to consider the selection of a British lady to be Europe’s first “Foreign Minister” to be a victory for his country and for its role in Europe and the world, instead of considering it a factor of stability and unity for the shared European project.