The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
Winners and losers in Copenhagen: the EU, for starters Dec 21st 2009, 19:06 by Charlemagne THERE are many things to be said about the global climate change talks in Copenhagen. At the risk of seeming solipsistic, the thing that stands out here in Brussels is the almost-total absence of the European Union from the final, depressing bouts of deal-making. (...) Of the BRIC nations, Brazil is one that appeals to Europeans rather, or rather, it is the one that looks the most "herbivorous" and thus Euro-compatible, to borrow a word from the European Council on Foreign Relations (who recently declared that the EU was popular round the world because it was seen as a herbivorous power). Which means Brazil talks a good game about peace and climate change and saving the rainforests, and does not spend lots of money building up or maintaining scary nuclear-armed militaries to threaten its neighbours. The African Union, a rather weak and cash-strapped body, is rather popular in Brussels as a partner for peacekeeping missions, and in its structures is modelled on the EU: it has a council, and a rotating presidency and a commission etc etc. (I once heard somebody at a meeting with the Portuguese foreign minister suggest the AU was a very good thing simply because it was modelled on the EU). (...) The new world order is still shaking out. Not all meetings will be as ghastly as this one, run on the need to find consensus between all UN member states. But the G20 meetings have been grim for the EU qua EU, too, with Europe barely featuring as a political player. I take no pleasure in this: on climate change, I think the European policy is pretty sound at the macro-level. Europeans basically recognise that there is a serious risk of something catastrophic happening and the chances are it will be cheaper to try to fix it now, than to do nothing. But this is an increasingly dangerous world for herbivorous clubs, built on an internal bargain of redistribution in exchange for open borders. The winners of this new world are big and aggressive continental nations, defending national interests with great single-mindedness.
Dec 21st 2009, 19:06 by Charlemagne
THERE are many things to be said about the global climate change talks in Copenhagen. At the risk of seeming solipsistic, the thing that stands out here in Brussels is the almost-total absence of the European Union from the final, depressing bouts of deal-making.
(...)
Of the BRIC nations, Brazil is one that appeals to Europeans rather, or rather, it is the one that looks the most "herbivorous" and thus Euro-compatible, to borrow a word from the European Council on Foreign Relations (who recently declared that the EU was popular round the world because it was seen as a herbivorous power). Which means Brazil talks a good game about peace and climate change and saving the rainforests, and does not spend lots of money building up or maintaining scary nuclear-armed militaries to threaten its neighbours. The African Union, a rather weak and cash-strapped body, is rather popular in Brussels as a partner for peacekeeping missions, and in its structures is modelled on the EU: it has a council, and a rotating presidency and a commission etc etc. (I once heard somebody at a meeting with the Portuguese foreign minister suggest the AU was a very good thing simply because it was modelled on the EU).
The new world order is still shaking out. Not all meetings will be as ghastly as this one, run on the need to find consensus between all UN member states. But the G20 meetings have been grim for the EU qua EU, too, with Europe barely featuring as a political player. I take no pleasure in this: on climate change, I think the European policy is pretty sound at the macro-level. Europeans basically recognise that there is a serious risk of something catastrophic happening and the chances are it will be cheaper to try to fix it now, than to do nothing. But this is an increasingly dangerous world for herbivorous clubs, built on an internal bargain of redistribution in exchange for open borders. The winners of this new world are big and aggressive continental nations, defending national interests with great single-mindedness.
The fact that the EU was already committed to doing more before the conference than the others were even willing to contemplate talking about somehow does not come to this guy's mind.
No, it's Europeans are weak, divided and pathetic. So what else is new... In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
by Frank Schnittger - Feb 2 1 comment
by Frank Schnittger - Jan 26 3 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jan 31 3 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jan 22 3 comments
by Cat - Jan 25 61 comments
by Oui - Jan 9 21 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jan 13 28 comments
by gmoke - Jan 20
by Oui - Feb 310 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Feb 21 comment
by Oui - Feb 226 comments
by Oui - Feb 14 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jan 313 comments
by gmoke - Jan 29
by Oui - Jan 2731 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jan 263 comments
by Cat - Jan 2561 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jan 223 comments
by Oui - Jan 2110 comments
by Oui - Jan 21
by Oui - Jan 20
by Oui - Jan 1841 comments
by Oui - Jan 1591 comments
by Oui - Jan 145 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jan 1328 comments
by Oui - Jan 1221 comments
by Oui - Jan 1120 comments