Examination of Witnesses (Questions 60-65)
RT HON
PETER HAIN
MP AND MR
KIM DARROCH
CMG
TUESDAY 1 APRIL 2003
Andrew Mackinlay
60. I suppose one of the things which we have
not uttered this afternoon with you in this context is the recent
painful experience we have had in relation to getting an agreement
amongst European Union partners on Iraq. And really has that rather
traumatic, bruising experience altered in any way your thinking
as to how either realistic or how fast we can go in this ambition,
a perfectly legitimate one, of trying to secure a Common Foreign
and Security Policy and collaboration on defence? It seems to
me that those of us who actually do see this as an attractive
proposition, as an ideal, nevertheless, have to acknowledge that
recent weeks have left that concept somewhat bruised, I think.
Discuss.
(Mr Hain) First of all, there is the
issue as to how has the debate on Iraq within the European Union
affected current European Security and Defence Policy initiatives,
and really it has not affected it at all. There have been differences
in both the European Union and in NATO, but that has not prevented
rapid progress in the last two months to complete the NATO/EU
Permanent Arrangements, and the decision that a European Union
military mission should take over from NATO in Macedonia, that
has gone ahead. And the ESDP mission takeover in Macedonia is
a very significant and welcome evolution in Europe's capability
for external action, and also in NATO-EU relations; so that has
not affected it at all. I think it is important, too, just to
recognise that five others of the existing Member States backed
the position that Britain has taken over Iraq, so it is six in
total out of the existing Member States; now that is a minority
but it is a very substantial minority, a very substantial one
anyway. And, within the new Europe, 14 of the 25 Member States,
a clear majority, have backed what we are doing in Iraq. So the
idea that Britain is isolated in Europe, or that the development
of a sensible Common Foreign and Security Policy will become impossible
in Europe, I just do not think holds. I think that we remain a
leading European power, a very influential one, we have a lot
of support, even on the very, very difficult issue of Iraq, as
those figures show, and despite the differences that there have
been.
Chairman
61. Secretary of State, one final question on
the parliamentary dimension of control of CFSP and ESDP. You know
there has been a substantial debate on this, the starting-point
is that foreign policy, defence policy, essentially is a matter
for national governments and national parliaments; the European
Parliament has its role, particularly in respect of aid policy,
and in respect of civilian emergencies, and so on. But there is
an area in-between when there are integrated operations by the
European Union, which could include defence matters, as we have
now, I think it is today, is it not, that the Macedonia operation
is starting?
(Mr Hain) I believe so, yes.
62. Then we can move on to Bosnia, with the
British/French initiative of an EU defence operation in Bosnia,
integration which could include aid, which could include civilian
administration. So do you accept that somewhere between the role
of national parliaments and the European Parliament there is a
lacuna, there is an area which has not yet been filled by any
form of parliamentary oversight, and should be?
(Mr Hain) I would certainly be very interested to
see any proposals that your Committee made, Chairman, on this
area. Can I make just one point of principle, first. The difference
between our view of Common Foreign and Security Policy and that
of many other countries is that we see it has been a continuum
between, if you like, the soft end, aid and trade, to some extent,
and the hard end, soldiers; and if your foreign policy fails your
soldiers have to pick up the pieces and your aid policy has to
bear the burden thereafter. So I think we have to look at CFSP
in terms of a continuous thread, rather than box off bits of it,
in a way that some, for example, have said, "Well, foreign
policy should be communitised, but keep defence policy under unanimity."
Well that just is not acceptable. But there are all sorts of contradictions.
I noticed, for example, that the European Parliament was able
to block what I think was
70 million of aid—you may remember, Kim—to
Afghanistan for many months, in the reconstruction of Afghanistan,
which is an outrageous decision of the European Parliament, not
actually because they did not want the money spent there, but
because they were embroiled in some other argument with the Commission
and the Council over the way the budget was spent. Now we have
got to have a situation where, if Europe decides to do something
like contribute to the rebuilding of Afghanistan or, as we intend,
the redevelopment of Iraq after decades of Saddam's murderous
rule, this sort of playing around by the European Parliament could
not obstruct us.
63. Then do you see the need for the creation
of a new institution to bring together the European Parliament
and national parliaments in this field?
(Mr Hain) We are not very keen on new institutions
at the European level. President Giscard d'Estaing and others
have suggested this idea of a Congress, which could do precisely
that, bring together European and national parliamentary representatives.
Nobody has really fleshed out this idea and said what role it
would play, does it have any electoral role, how often would it
meet, and so on, and until somebody has sketched that out, in
a sensible and a coherent fashion, we are not really in a position
to take a judgment on it.
64. And we will not contribute to the debate?
(Mr Hain) We will contribute to the debate by asking
questions, as I have asked already, but it is not in our prospectus,
and until somebody produces a convincing proposition it will not
be in our prospectus.
65. So the Committee, and indeed you, will be
asking questions?
(Mr Hain) Yes, and if the Committee has any wisdom
to offer on this I would gladly read it.
Chairman: Secretary of State, you have been
helpful, the debate will continue. May I thank you, and Mr Darroch
will be coming for the second session. The first session is now
concluded. Thank you.
|
